• About
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   Institutional Repository Home
    • Electronic Theses and Dissertations
    • Electronic Theses and Dissertations
    • View Item
    •   Institutional Repository Home
    • Electronic Theses and Dissertations
    • Electronic Theses and Dissertations
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of Institutional RepositoryCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Writing to Learn in Science: Effects on Fourth-Grade Students' Understanding of Balance

    Gillespie, Amy Marie
    : https://etd.library.vanderbilt.edu/etd-06062014-141403
    http://hdl.handle.net/1803/12488
    : 2014-06-18

    Abstract

    In this study, 69 grade 4 students were randomly assigned to a writing to learn (n = 23), comparison (n = 23), or control (n = 23) condition. In treatment and comparison, students made predictions and recorded results for 30 balance trials which involved different configurations of weights on an equal arm balance beam. Treatment students wrote 4 short answer responses about what they were learning during the trials and wrote an extended response after the trials about what they had learned about balance. To control for writing time, comparison students wrote 4 short answer responses about their favorite parts of the trials and wrote an extended response about their favorite parts of science class. Students in the control condition (n = 23) participated in business as usual classroom instruction. There were no statistically significant differences between treatment and comparison conditions on a 20-item balance knowledge posttest. However, students in the control condition outperformed students in the treatment (ES = 0.89) and comparison (ES = 1.05) on posttest questions at the lowest level of balance understanding (i.e., level 1). For balance knowledge questions at the highest levels, levels 3 and 4, the treatment condition (ESs = 1.42 and 0.94, respectively) and the comparison condition (ESs = 1.62 and 1.37, respectively) outperformed the control. No statistically significant differences were found between conditions for total words written and level of balance understanding on a posttest extended writing prompt. Implications of these findings and directions for future research on writing to learn are discussed.
    Show full item record

    Files in this item

    Icon
    Name:
    Gillespie.pdf
    Size:
    1.514Mb
    Format:
    PDF
    View/Open

    This item appears in the following collection(s):

    • Electronic Theses and Dissertations

    Connect with Vanderbilt Libraries

    Your Vanderbilt

    • Alumni
    • Current Students
    • Faculty & Staff
    • International Students
    • Media
    • Parents & Family
    • Prospective Students
    • Researchers
    • Sports Fans
    • Visitors & Neighbors

    Support the Jean and Alexander Heard Libraries

    Support the Library...Give Now

    Gifts to the Libraries support the learning and research needs of the entire Vanderbilt community. Learn more about giving to the Libraries.

    Become a Friend of the Libraries

    Quick Links

    • Hours
    • About
    • Employment
    • Staff Directory
    • Accessibility Services
    • Contact
    • Vanderbilt Home
    • Privacy Policy