Hypertext writing and observational learning: Effects on writing skills

1. Hypertext writing and observational learning: Effects on writing skills Martine Braaksma, Gert Rijlaarsdam, & Huub van den Bergh University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands Writing Research Across Borders II, February 17th-20th 2011, Washington, USA

2. Several text types in language arts (“learning- to-write”) Learning or assessment tool in other subject domains (“writing-to-learn”) ICT important role in information retrieval and text composition and revision Practice and research mostly restricted to traditional paper format and focused on deconstruction of the phases of the writing process Based on two assumptions of learning: similarity of tasks (linear text = aim -> linear text = means) practice makes perfect (learning to write by writing) Writing in upper secondary education

3. Can two innovative learning arrangements improve writing education? Two learning arrangements: writing hypertexts (instead of writing linear texts) observational learning (instead of performing) Effects on: writing skills (writing processes, linear text quality, self-efficacy for writing, knowledge about writing) content knowledge (knowledge about the topic of writing) Aim project

4. Hypertext writing as a way to enhance learning (learning to write) Beneficial effects on: Writing skills (writing processes and text quality): Hypertext writing: students become aware of hierarchical text structures Hypertext writing: more planning and analysis than linear writing More planning & analysis = better product quality of hypertext and linear text Hypertext writing: more learning time on structuring information Hypertext writing

5. Shown to be effective for learning to write several types of texts for different types of students Makes it possible to make covert (writing) processes visible Cognitive effort shifts from executing writing tasks to learning Stimulates to use metacognitive strategies explicitly so input for learning is increased Observational learning

6. Pre-tests (aptitude, computer skills, self-efficacy for writing, linear writing processes, linear text quality, knowledge about writing, content knowledge) Experimental lesson series (LIN, HYP, OBS) or regular writing lessons (CON) Post-tests (self-efficacy for writing, linear writing processes, linear text quality, knowledge about writing, content knowledge) Design

7. 104 students from a secondary school in Amsterdam Grade eleven, pre-university level (age about 16-17 years) 78 students randomly distributed to different conditions: LIN (22), HYP (26), and OBS (30) Participated during writing classes in the experiment (three conditions in one class) (trained teacher) 26 students participated in an extra Control group (CON) and followed regular writing lessons (own teacher) Participants

8. Five lessons (around 70 minutes each) on writing argumentative texts Three conditions (LIN, HYP, and OBS) All activities in class, no homework Theme: ‘good charities’, documentation provided First 2 lessons based on ‘inquiry learning’ (Hillocks, 1986) exactly the same for the three conditions Lesson 3-5: same learning activities, but (writing) tasks in HYP-format, LIN-format or via OBS Main overview experimental lesson series

9. Lessons and conditions

10. Main focus in lessons

11. Students’ hypertexts Observational learning Thinking of a working title, lesson 4 (Floor and Toon) Some examples

12. Some examples of students’ hypertexts

13. Examples (continued)

14. No a-priori differences between conditions on Computer skills (p =.623) Aptitude (p = .761) Results: Pre-test scores

15. Measured with questionnaire (based on Zimmerman & Bandura, 1994) Regression analyses All conditions: self-efficacy after intervention > before No differences between conditions in mean post-test scores for students with average self-efficacy in pre-test Aptitude-treatment-interaction: interaction between intervention and initial level of self-efficacy was stronger for LINthan for HYP, OBS, and CON Effects on self-efficacy for writing

16. Effects on self-efficacy for writing

17. Global text quality (based on goal, text structure, quality of (subordinate) arguments, etc.) Essays coded by three independent raters Regression analyses No differences between conditions for post-test text quality for students with a mean score at the pre-test Aptitude-treatment-interaction: in HYP and OBS: the higher the initial level of text quality, the more students profited from these interventions Effects on argumentative text quality (linear text)

18. Effects on argumentative text quality (linear text)

19. Experimental lesson series effective for self-efficacy for writing Students with a high initial self-efficacy profited most from all interventions, but especially in LIN Same text format tests – intervention in comparison with HYP and OBS? Students with a high initial writing skill profited most for argumentative text quality in HYP and OBS Maybe these students could cope with the unusual learning formats of HYP and OBS and transfer their ‘new’ writing approach to linear writing Discussion

20. Paper, slides, publications, lesson materials at: http://www.ilo.uva.nl/homepages/martine.htm Email: braaksma@uva.nl More information