The Effects of Writing Activities on Grade 4 Children's Understanding of Simple Machines, Inventions, and Inventors.

This paper explores the effects of infusing writing-to-learn strategies into an inquiry-oriented science unit on simple machines, inventions and inventors. This study used an intact group pretest and posttest design to capture the ecological validity of a classroom of grade 4 students and teacher. The design incorporated quantitative research methods of structured interviews of target students. Students' science understanding and writing skills were documented further with daily teacher reflections and students writing samples. This hybrid research design was selected to provide richness and depth to any conceptual changes detected and to identify potential relationships between writing tasks and science achievement within the limitations of a nonrandom intact group. Student performance on the pretest indicated minimum prior knowledge of simple machines, inventions, and inventors. Students correctly answered 37.3% of the recall items, 9.5% of the understanding items, and 25.3% of all items. Performance on the posttest demonstrated a marked improvement: students correctly answered 75.6% of recall items, 60% of understanding items, and 69.2% of all items. A correlated t-test showed that there was a significant difference between pretest and posttest means. (CCM) ******************************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. ******************************************************************************** The Effects of Writing Activities on Grade 4 Children's Understanding of Simple Machines, Inventions, and Inventors PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) Joan M. Tucknott School District #61 Victoria, B.C. VOS MO Canada Larry D. Yore University of Victoria Victoria, B.C. V8W 3N4 Canada U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Educational Research and Improvement ED CATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) This document has been reproduced as ed from the person or organization originating it. 0 Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality. Points of view or opinions stated in this document do not necessarily represent official OERI position or policy. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Boston, 11/1,4, March 27-31. 1999. 2 BEST COPY AVAILABLE The Effects of Writing Activities on Grade 4 Children's Understanding of Simple Machines, Inventions, and Inventors

[1]  Peter Rillero,et al.  Write from the Start: Writing-to-Learn Science and Mathematics. , 1995 .

[2]  Vaughan Prain,et al.  Writing for learning in the junior secondary science classroom : issues arising from a case study , 1996 .

[3]  Carole Ford.  Reforms, Visions, and Standards: A Cross-Curricular View from an Elementary School Perspective. , 1997 .

[4]  D. Galbraith.  Conditions for discovery through writing , 1992 .

[5]  J. Lemke.  Talking Science: Language, Learning, and Values , 1990 .

[6]  Larry D. Yore,et al.  The effects of explicit science reading instruction on selected grade 7 students' metacognition and comprehension of specific science text , 1999 .

[7]  Carolyn W. Keys.  Revitalizing instruction in scientific genres: Connecting knowledge production with writing to learn in science , 1999 .

[8]  Vaughan Prain,et al.  Writing for learning in secondary science: Rethinking practices , 1996 .

[9]  C. A. Rogers,et al.  USING COOPERATIVE LEARNING TO IMPROVE READING AND WRITING IN SCIENCE , 1997 .

[10]  Vaughan Prain,et al.  Students' Perceptions of Writing for Learning in Secondary School Science. , 1999 .

[11]  J. Hayes,et al.  Writing Research and the Writer. , 1986 .

[12]  Steve Moline.  I See What You Mean Children at Work With Visual Information , 1995 .

[13]  Maureen Lewis,et al.  Teaching Factual Writing: Purpose and Structure , 1997 .

[14]  Michel Ferrari,et al.  What makes a good writer? Differences in good and poor writers' self-regulation of writing , 1998 .

[15]  David F. Treagust,et al.  Examining the construction process: A study of changes in level 10 students' understanding of classical mechanics , 1997 .

[16]  Patricia M. Rowell.  Learning in School Science: The Promises and Practices of Writing. , 1997 .

[17]  J. Shea.  National Science Education Standards , 1995 .

[18]  Gretchen Linton,et al.  Letters, We Get Letters. , 1997 .

[19]  Steve Graham,et al.  Direct teaching, strategy instruction, and strategy instruction with explicit self-regulation: Effects on the composition skills and self-efficacy of students with learning disabilities. , 1992 .

[20]  P. David Pearson.  Standards for the English Language Arts: A Policy Perspective1 , 1993 .

[21]  M. Scardamalia,et al.  The psychology of written composition , 1987 .

[22]  Marlene Scardamalia,et al.  Helping Students Become Better Writers. , 1985 .

[23]  A. Collins.  National Science Education Standards: A Political Document. , 1998 .

[24]  Larry D. Yore,et al.  The reading–science learning–writing connection: Breakthroughs, barriers, and promises , 1994 .