ICT Efficacy and Efficiency for Academic Writing - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

ict efficacy and efficiency for academic writing n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
ICT Efficacy and Efficiency for Academic Writing PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
ICT Efficacy and Efficiency for Academic Writing

play fullscreen
1 / 23
ICT Efficacy and Efficiency for Academic Writing
102 Views
Download Presentation
mercer
Download Presentation

ICT Efficacy and Efficiency for Academic Writing

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. ICT Efficacy and Efficiency for Academic Writing William S. Warner, Ph.D. William S. Warner

  2. Combine audio, visual and written feedback • Compare efficacy and efficiency • Assess instructor and student response Of all the factors that make a difference to student outcomes, the power of feedback is paramount.... Hattie, J.C (2009) Visible Learning Information and Communication Technology William S. Warner

  3. 13 Assignments 2-3 Days for Feedback Fronter-based William S. Warner

  4. IMPACT TIME Efficiency vs. Efficacy William S. Warner

  5. Efficacy – 29 Students Efficiency – 5 TAs • Appealing idea Unhelpful % Helpful 2 1 0 1 2 Written 0 5 7 7 81 Tutor 0 0 3 21 76 Fronter 0 2 14 30 54 Rubric 0 4 12 35 49 Audio 3 10 3 38 45 • 10-30 seconds/comment • 1-2 comments/paragraph • Too soon to judge • Technical snags • Time-consuming Pilot Project Evaluation

  6. Disagree % Agree audio is more… 2 1 0 1 2 • efficient 20 40 30 20 0 • effective 0 305020 0 • More suite for encouraging than editing Relative to Fronter comments William S. Warner

  7. Final 3 papers – with rubric • TAs • Spot more errors • Rubric provides equitable quality-control • Ease of evaluation: 4X4 matrix • Students • Written comments qualified detail • Rubric quantified standards: 16-24 points • Targets strengths and weaknesses Hard Copy Preferred William S. Warner

  8. 0-1 2 3 4 Rubric William S. Warner

  9. We’re not as smart as we think StudentTARubric Scores William S. Warner

  10. Audio replaced with JING • SKYPE introduced • Social media • 6 (45-min) video lectures • Introduction • Outline • Clarity • Cohesion • Tables & Figures Autumn 2012 William S. Warner

  11. William S. Warner

  12. Writing Centre http://www.umb.no/nwc/ • Writing Wrongs Blog http://writingwrongsblog.wordpress.com/ Social Media William S. Warner

  13. Autumn – 3 assignments 81 students: 49 BSc, 32 MSc Spring – 10 assignments 75 students: 15 BSc, 60 MSc Unhelpful % Helpful 2 1 0 1 2 JING 0 0 0 18 82 Tutor 0 0 3 15 82 Paper 0 0 11 39 50 Rubric 0 1 12 41 45 I found JING as helpful as the tutor Disagree % Agree 2 1 0 1 2 5 11 23 2928 Unhelpful % Helpful 2 1 0 1 2 JING 0 2 2 16 80 Tutor 0 0 12 2761 Fronter 0 4 7 29 60 Paper 0 6 6 41 44 Rubric 0 2 10 45 43 I prefer JING to Fronter comments Disagree % Agree 2 1 0 1 2 6 4 14 19 57 Effect William S. Warner

  14. Autumn Spring • 98 % students found JING increased writing efficiency • Easier to understand than cryptic or loaded sentences • Voice tone • Emphasize/prioritize • Confidence/support JING saved me time Disagree % Agree 2 1 0 1 2 0 7 20 3538 JING motivated/gave me confidence Disagree % Agree 2 1 0 1 2 3 3 20 4035 JING improved my writing Disagree % Agree 2 1 0 1 2 0 1 3342 24 STUDENT: Efficient Effect William S. Warner

  15. Autumn 6 TAs 3 assignments Did not track student Spring 8 TAs 4 and 6 assignments Tracked 10 students • Efficacy • Very effective – 4 • Effective – 2 • Efficiency • Very efficient – 1 • Efficient – 5 • Efficacy • Very effective - 1 • Effective - 6 • Efficiency • Very efficient - 2 • Efficient - 5 Not 2 1 0 1 2 Very Effective/Efficient TA Evaluation William S. Warner

  16. JING’s impact on student writing is noticeable when tracking re-writes. Agree Disagree 2 1 0 1 2 5 2 0 0 0 Which feedback method provides the most help to a student in the least amount of time? 5 JING 4 Face-to-face consultation 1 Rubric 1 Writing comments on hard copy Spring TAs William S. Warner

  17. 30 minutes/session 30 sessions/term Unhelpful (students) Helpful 2 1 0 1 2 Autumn 10 students 0 1 2 4 3 Spring 17 students 1 0 5 4 7 For night owl or procrastinator? William S. Warner

  18. I suggest that you watch the video lecture on… • Half watched the video lectures Unhelpful % Helpful 2 1 0 1 2 Autumn(40) 0 0 2 63 35 Spring (34) 0 0 9 35 56 Video Lectures William S. Warner

  19. 80% watched • Principles of paraphrasing http://isites.harvard.edu/icb/icb.do?keyword=paraphrasing • APA Format for Referencing http://isites.harvard.edu/icb/icb.do?keyword=apa_exposed Unhelpful % Helpful 2 1 0 1 2 Autumn 1 3 13 33 50 Spring 0 2 5 36 58 SpringFeedback Tutorials William S. Warner

  20. Half (75) students found Unhelpful Very helpful 2 1 0 1 2 Website 1 0 18 20 12 Writing Wrongs blog 0 0 12 28 15 Student Journal 0 0 10 11 7 Social Media William S. Warner

  21. Develop protocol • Read first – not on the fly • Balloon comment • Color code highlight • Green – good • Yellow – suggest/consider • Red - error • I suggest you watch the video lecture on cohesion, which explains how to make transitions betweens paragraphs. • Save document on Fronter Recommendations William S. Warner

  22. Integrate JING across curriculum • Require video tutorials (e.g., EndNote) • Develop social media for peer-review • Explore MOOC automated feedback Conclusions William S. Warner