Nghiên cứu về thực hành viết có chủ ý của giáo viên trung học tại một khu học chánh công lập

A Survey of Intentional Writing Practices of High School Teachers in One Public School District: A Replication Study Trenton S., University of Kansas, 1996 M., University of Kansas, 1998 Submitted to the Graduate Department and Faculty of the School of Education of Baker University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education in Educational Leadership _______________________________ Dennis King, Ed. Major Advisor ________________________________ Verneda Edwards, Ed. ________________________________ Tyson Ostroski, Ed. Date Defended: March 24, 2017 Copyright 2017 by Trenton S.

Stern Abstract The use of evidence-based or research-supported assignments, instructional strategies, and adaptations (AIA) by core content-area (English Language Arts [ELA], math, science, and social studies) secondary teachers in one public school district (District X) in Kansas was the focus of this study. Seven research questions guided the investigation concerning the frequency (percent) of responses, equity of distribution, and rank order for AIA in writing and perceptions about preparedness to teach writing for all high school teachers and broken down by core content area. The study of Kiuhara, Graham, and Hawken (2009) was replicated using a modified version of their High School Writing Practice Survey. After two requests, 105 of 237 teachers (44%) completed the survey.

The results of chi-square testing revealed significant differences in the frequency and rank order of AIA between and among the core content areas. AIA in writing were evident but used inconsistently across content areas. Writing instruction was most prevalent in ELA and least evident in math. Results indicated few extended writing opportunities for students.

Data also provided evidence of teachers’ perceived lack of preparedness to teach writing in their core content areas. The study provides implications for the development of content-specific writing curricula as well as targeted professional development for content-area teachers. ii Dedication This work is dedicated to my family. To my courageous and beautiful wife, Jill, thank you for seeing in me what I have not always been able to see in myself.

I will love you forever and always. To Anna, Rhylan, and Dylan, you inspire me daily. My love for each of you is unconditional. To my parents, Harlan and Ramona Stern, your never- ending faith in me and constant support have never waned.

I live each moment to honor your love, your sacrifice, your selflessness, and the many qualities you have instilled in me. Words cannot do justice to the love and respect I have for all of you. iii Acknowledgements The accomplishment of completing a dissertation is reserved for one individual; however, the credit deserves to be shared by many. I am most thankful for the support of my wife, Jill, and my children, Anna, Rhylan, and Dylan.

I could not have succeeded without their love, encouragement, support, and sacrifice throughout this endeavor. They have lived every emotion of this journey, and for this, I am filled with gratitude. I am also thankful for the love and support of my parents, Ramona and Harlan Stern. They taught me to value hard work and education and always encouraged me to pursue my dreams.

I also wish to express my sincere gratitude to my major advisor, Dr. Dennis King, and research analyst, Dr. Their guidance and feedback were instrumental in shaping my thinking throughout this process. They always challenged me to produce my best and remained focused on one singular purpose.

This dissertation would not be possible without their encouragement and wisdom. I would also like to thank the other members of my committee, Dr. Verneda Edwards and Dr. Tyson Ostroski, for their time, feedback, and support throughout this process.

Throughout my career, I have been blessed with good fortune to have worked with and learned from many dedicated and talented professional educators. These colleagues have always been more than coworkers; they are my friends and family. I owe my skill as a teacher and leader to them and their influence. I also want to acknowledge all of the participants in this study for their contributions to the profession and their commitment to students.

I am also thankful for iv the support and encouragement from my classmates in Cohort 14. I am a better leader and person having gone through this experience with them. In closing, I must take a moment to recognize and thank all of the teachers and professors I have learned from throughout my life. They instilled in me a love of learning that has made this moment possible.

And thank you to all my students who helped me to hone my teaching and leadership skills. I am forever indebted to them for the learning and laughter we shared with one another. Because of all the lessons they taught me, I have the courage to believe, to grow, and to dream. v Table of Contents Abstract.

iv Table of Contents. vi List of Tables. ix Chapter One: Introduction .3 Statement of the Problem .10 Purpose of the Study .11 Significance of the Study .13 Definition of Terms.15 Organization of the Study .15 Chapter Two: Review of the Literature .17 History of Rhetoric .18 Writing Instruction in 19th-century America .20 Writing Instruction in 20th-century America .24 Writing Instruction in 21st-century America .32 Impact of Learning Theory .34 Evidence-based or Research-supported Writing Instruction .36 vi Teacher Preparedness to Teach Writing .43 Chapter Three: Methods .45 Selection of Participants .48 Teacher Writing Survey .48 Validity and Reliability .49 Data Collection Procedures.51 Data Analysis and Hypothesis Testing .56 Chapter Four: Results .75 Chapter Five: Interpretation and Recommendations .77 Overview of the Problem .77 Purpose Statement and Research Questions .78 Review of the Methodology.80 vii Findings Related to the Literature.83 Implications for Action .83 Recommendations for Future Research. Teacher Writing Survey.

Request to Modify High School Writing Practice Survey. Permission to Modify High School Writing Practice Survey. Request to Conduct Research in District X. Permission to Conduct Research in District X.

Baker University IRB Request to Conduct Research. Baker University IRB Approval to Conduct Research. Cover Letter with Consent to Participate Sent via District X Email to Core Content-area Teachers.119 viii List of Tables Table 1. Content Area Reported by District X Teacher Participants.

Highest Degree Attained Reported by District X Teacher Participants. Years of Experience Reported by District X Teacher Participants. Most Regularly Reported Use of AIA by Core Content Area. Summary of Proportional Distribution of Writing Activities.

Summary of Proportional Distribution of Writing Instruction. Summary of Proportional Distribution of Writing Adaptations. Summary of Proportional Distribution of Teacher Preparedness. Summary of Proportional Distribution of Writing Activities Broken Down by Content Area.

Summary of Proportional Distribution of Writing Instruction Broken Down by Content Area. Summary of Proportional Distribution of Writing Adaptations Broken Down by Content Area .75 ix 1 Chapter One Introduction In academia, writing has been generalized as an arduous activity or process through which individuals seemingly employ different strategies to individual writing tasks based on the tasks themselves and the abilities of the writers. As a skill, writing has been difficult to define because it has been used in so many different ways and for so many purposes. Applebee and Langer (2013) have concluded that writing as a means to study, learn, construct knowledge, or develop deeper understandings is not common.

In 1981, Applebee conducted a national study that revealed approximately 60% of writing happened in content areas other than English (as cited in Ruddell, 1993). In other words, the majority of student writing was thought to occur in English language arts; however, students reported that the combined amount of writing in all other courses was greater than that completed in English courses (Applebee & Langer, 2013). In response to growing concerns about student performance as highlighted by A Nation at Risk in 1983 and to educational reform legislation such as the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 (2002), Applebee and Langer (2013) conducted the National Study of Writing Instruction “to understand the impact of the variety of changes that have taken place through a series of studies that provide different perspectives on writing and learning” (p. As part of this study, Applebee and Langer conducted case studies, examined instructional practices, and surveyed teachers to determine how well students write.

The researchers also analyzed National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) data; however, NAEP was not designed to answer this question or to determine if students were prepared to meet the writing demands of college or the workplace (Applebee & 2 Langer, 2006, 2013). The results of the research conducted by Applebee and Langer (2006) relied on student and teacher reported information about writing experiences and showed there was a relationship between how well students write, types of writing assigned, and types of instruction received (Apple & Langer, 2006, 2013). Outside of this study, there has been limited available data focused on the teacher reported practices regarding writing instruction in high school classrooms. In the time since the National Study of Writing Instruction was conducted, education has faced scrutiny in the area of literacy, specifically writing.

According to Gallagher (2006), students may have been writing more frequently; however, too often teachers were asking students to write without providing explicit instruction in writing. With the development of the Common Core writing standards, teachers gained a greater understanding of the importance of writing instruction but not in how to teach writing (Calkins et al. As much as 80% of the writing assigned to students called for simple tasks such as note-taking rather than actual composition (Applebee & Langer, 2013). Kiuhara, Hawken, and Graham (2009) conducted a national writing survey of high school teachers in an attempt to gather teacher reported information to guide high school writing instruction reform.

Kiuhara et al. (2009) have expressed concern about the lack of evidence-based or research-supported assignments, instructional strategies, and adaptations (AIA) used by high school teachers to teach writing. One explanation for the lack of writing instruction in classrooms has been attributed to a lack of explicit preparation to teach writing within teacher education programs (Brenner, 2013; Grisham & Wolsey, 2011; National Commission on Writing [NCW], 2003; Smagorinsky, Wilson & Moore, 2011; Totten, 2005). In self-efficacy studies, teachers reported feeling most 3 ill-prepared to effectively teach writing (Al-Bataineh, Holmes, Jerich, & Williams, 2010; Bratcher & Stroble, 1994; Dismuke, 2015; Graham & Perin, 2007b; Street & Stang, 2009; Troia & Graham, 2003).

According to the National Writing Project, teachers have needed to feel confident and comfortable with writing to feel competent in teaching it (Bratcher & Stroble, 1994; Graham & Perin, 2007b). The High School Writing Practice Survey conducted by Kiuhara et al. (2009) served as the basis for this study in an effort to identify the intentional writing instructional practices of core content-area teachers (English language arts, math, science, and social studies) to inform writing instruction reform and professional development for District X teachers. The statement of the problem, purpose, and significance of the study have been included to provide an understanding of the importance of the study.

Delimitations, assumptions, research questions, and definitions of terms have been provided for clarity. Finally, an organization of the study has been included as a preview of the remainder of the study. Background On April 26, 1983, the U. Department of Education (USDE) released a watershed report that declared the United States was a nation at risk.

This report was the culmination of efforts by the National Commission on Excellence in Education to address concerns that educational performance of the nation’s students had fallen behind other industrialized countries and “lost sight of the basic purposes of schooling, and of the high expectations and disciplined effort needed to attain them” (USDE, 1983, “A Nation at Risk,” para. The Commission identified numerous indicators of risk.