dc.contributor.author	Lashley, Sarah Annita
dc.coverage.spatial	Central and North America -- United States	en_US
dc.coverage.temporal	2008-2015	en_US
dc.date.accessioned	2015-12-17T15:17:58Z
dc.date.available	2015-12-17T15:17:58Z
dc.date.issued	2015-12-16
dc.identifier.other	5A8C31B1-E1AF-463A-9775-43C6740117EC	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10428/2024
dc.description.abstract	The purpose of this study was to determine how collaborative practice utilizing different instructional strategies (Strategy A-Collaborative Traditional, Strategy B-Collaborative GIST Summary Writing, and Strategy C-Collaborative GIST Summary Writing with Technology) would affect students’ individual performance on summary writing. The technology piece was dropped after Lesson One due to insufficient time for technology use and student frustration. Thus, Group C followed the same format as Group B. A mixed-methods explanatory design was utilized in this study. Students’ overall scores and scores on each rubric element were collected and analyzed for individual pre-, mid-, and post-assessments to determine if there were any differences among groups. Student summaries, teacher journals, and teacher and student interviews were collected to examine factors affecting the differences in student assessment scores, and teacher and student perceptions about student performance on collaborative GIST summary writing. MANCOVA tests were used to analyze the quantitative data and content analyses were used to analyze the qualitative data. The findings showed that although no significant differences were found in the post-assessment scores between the collaborative traditional summarization group (A) and the collaborative GIST groups (B and C), there was still some evidence showing the effectiveness of the GIST strategy. The evidence included (a) a slight tendency toward significant differences in the post-assessment scores between Groups A and B, and Groups A and C, (b) Group C’s post-assessment score was the highest, out-performed Groups A and B on almost every rubric element, (c) a significant difference between Groups A and B on paraphrasing, and (d) a slight tendency toward significant differences between Groups A and C on focus and conventions. The pattern found in the content analysis of student summaries also supported the quantitative results. Although the GIST strategy had a positive impact on collaborative summary writing (e.g., helping students build on prior knowledge and improve their scores on summary writing), the following issues had to be addressed to help students use it: a) giving more time to complete the lessons, b) increasing student interests in the texts, c) increasing the GIST word limit, and d) offering extra guidance or feedback strategy. The findings also showed that collaboration did have a positive impact on students’ summary writing. Both teachers and students believed that collaborative summary practice was helpful. However, it might benefit low achievers more. In addition, technology used in this study did not really help with summary writing. Both teacher and students reported negative experiences with it. More time and extra guidance should be given when integrating technology into summary writing instructions.	en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents	Chapter I: INTRODUCTION 1 Statement of the Problem 1 Theoretical Framework 3 Purpose of the Study 4 Research Questions 5 Definition of Terms 5 Methodology 7 Significance of the Study 8 Organization of the Study 8 Chapter II: LITERATURE REVIEW 10 Literacy Skills 10 Importance of Summary Writing 14 GIST Summary Writing 17 Technology-Enhanced Instruction 19 Collaborative Learning 23 Collaborative Learning with Technology 27 Wikis for Collaboration 31 Summary 34 Chapter III: METHODOLOGY 37 Research Questions 37 Research Design 38 Quantitative Data 39 Qualitative Data 40 Sample Selection 42 Instrumentation 42 Instrument Validity and Reliability 46 Procedures and Data Collection 48 Assumptions of the Study 50 Limitations of the Study 51 Chapter IV: RESULTS 52 Research Questions 52 Changes to Research Plan 53 Research Question 1: Impact of Different Instructional Strategies on Individual Summaries 53 Research Question 2: Patterns in Length and Quality of Student Summaries 64 Paraphrasing 65 Focus 66 Conventions 67 Research Question 3: Seventh-Grade Teacher Perceptions about Student Performance on Collaborative GIST Summary Writing 68 Challenges Encountered when Using the GIST Strategy 69 Using the GIST Strategy Allowed Students to Build on Their Prior Knowledge 71 Teachers Believed that Student Scores of Summary Writing Improved with the Progression of the Unit 72 Collaboration Improved as the Unit Progressed 72 Research Question 4: Seventh-Grade Student Perceptions about Their Performance on Collaborative GIST Summary Writing 74 Most of the Students Understood the Use of the Assigned Strategy 75 Students Had Different Perceptions of the Word Limit When Using the GIST Strategy 75 Students Perceived the Helpfulness of Collaboration 76 Research Question 5: Seventh-Grade Teacher and Student Perceptions about Collaborative GIST Summary Writing with Technology 77 Students Had Difficulties in Learning with Technology 77 Most of the Students had Negative Perceptions of Technology’s Impact 78 Chapter V: CONCLUSIONS 80 Summary and Discussion 80 Conclusions 85 Recommendations for Future Research 86 Recommendations for Practitioners 88 Summary 89 REFERENCES 92 Appendix A: Teacher Reflective Journal Prompts 101 Appendix B: Teacher Interview Questions 103 Appendix C: Student Interview Questions 105 Appendix D: Institutional Review Board Approval and Consent Forms 107 Appendix E: Institutional Review Board Modification Approval and Consent Forms 115 Appendix F: Permission to Adapt Rubric from Frey, Fisher, and Hernandez (2003) 123 Appendix G: Original and Adapted Rubrics 125 Appendix H: Permission from Readworks.org to use Nonfiction Passages 128 Appendix I: Wiki Page Screenshot 130 Appendix J: Weekly Overview of Summary Instruction Lessons 132 Appendix K: Collaborative Traditional Lesson Plans 136 Appendix L: Collaborative GIST Only Lesson Plans 141 Appendix M: Collaborative GIST with Technology Lesson Plans 148 Appendix N: Teacher Reflective Journals 155 Appendix O: Teacher Interview Transcripts 160 Appendix P: Student Interview Transcripts 165	en_US
dc.language.iso	en_US	en_US
dc.subject	Education	en_US
dc.subject	Technology	en_US
dc.title	An Investigation of Student Collaborative Summary Writing with Different Instructional Strategies	en_US
dc.type	Dissertation	en_US
dc.contributor.department	Curriculum and Instruction	en_US
dc.description.advisor	Hsiao, E-Ling
dc.description.advisor	Wiley, Ellen W.
dc.description.committee	Daesang, Kim
dc.description.committee	Dees, Dianne C.
dc.description.degree	Ed.D.	en_US
dc.description.major	Education	en_US