The Effect of WIKI Implementation on Writing Skills in Content Area Writing more

The Effect of WIKI Implementation on Writing Skills in Content Area Writing by D. M. Harms Submitted in fulfillment of course requirements in EDU 621: Action Research Project Fall 2008 Wiki Effect on Writing 2 Michael P. French, Ph. D. Instructor Wiki Effect on Writing i The Effect of WIKI Implementation on Writing Skills in Content Area Writing: A Capstone Research Project David M. Harms Table of Contents Dedication......................................................................................................................ii Section I: The Topic.......................................................................................................1 Section II: The Review of Literature.............................................................................7 Section III: Methodology.............................................................................................21 Section IV: The Results...............................................................................................23 Section V: The Importance..........................................................................................33 References....................................................................................................................39 Wiki Effect on Writing ii Dedication: This paper is dedicated to Dr. Djisovi Eason and Dr. Lillian Ashcraft-Eason who showed me that non-traditional people like me could make great teachers. It is also dedicated to Dr. Michael French who assisted me through my entire Master’s experience, as well as some of my undergraduate work. My cohort partners, Nick Drennan and Jane Dorfmeister who put up with all of my quirky moods and helped push me through this study. My mother, Cher Bibler, deserves credit, she always told me to follow my heart. Dan Griffin gave me my work ethic and pushed me hard. My daughter, Krystal Harms, has had to put up with me going to school her entire teenage years. My father, Mark Harms, never gave up on me. My grandmother, Jean Bibler, taught me how to read, the value of education and was always there to help when times got tough. All of my friends have helped me stay sane through all my travels. Kristi has put up with and supported me for seventeen years. And finally to my grandfather, Robert Harms, who always wanted to be a history teacher but World War II got in the way…I’m finally going to the ice cream parlor to get that 33 scoop ice cream cone! Wiki Effect on Writing 1 Section I: The Topic Introduction to the topic Writing is a key to learning in all content areas and subjects. Student writing at the high school level has been identified as a concern in the academic community. “The writing performance of students about to finish high school in the United States is low in absolute terms and has changed little in relative terms during the past 25 years” (Jameson, 2007, p. 18). “Each fall, the nation’s newspapers are filled with laments over the decline in the writing skills of college students” (Gold, 2005, p. 792). School wide initiatives such as “Writing Across the Curriculum” have been implemented in many schools across the nation including being an initiative for the high school reform movement, High Schools That Work. Today’s students are growing up in a different world influenced by the emerging web 2.0 technologies. “Technology’s power is no longer just in making information available. Rather, the power to write ideas, share information and allow reflections to be published at will makes the difference” (Guhlin, 2008, p. 8). These technologies need to be embedded into education to help students increase success in writing. “Already the new version of the web is providing learning opportunities that just a decade ago were unimaginable” (David, 2007, p. 64). Wikis offer a way to easily publish material on the Internet without having to learn special programs or code. Instead of simply relying on their teacher’s expertise, students can now share their research and writing with the world wide academic community. “In contrast to traditional assignments, web-based work can be viewed by Wiki Effect on Writing 2 and commented on not only by instructors but by anyone on the planet with an internet connection” (David, 2007, p. 68). Statement of the Problem Penta Career Center has adopted the “Writing Across the Curriculum” model from the High Schools That Work initiative. In an effort to help improve our school and our students’ academic performance, teachers in all content areas have been encouraged to incorporate writing assignments into their lessons. The purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of the Web 2.0 technology wiki and see if implementation of a wiki in a Social Studies classroom helps increase the quantity and quality of student writing. Rationale I have been teaching Social Studies at Penta Career Center for the past seven years. A continuing problem we struggle with as a school is helping students who are preparing for a career in the trades understand the importance of good writing skills. Additionally, the implementation of the Ohio Graduation Tests required for graduation focuses much of our instruction on writing skills. In an effort to best serve the population of students in my classroom, I have been searching for a way to help students in Social Studies hone their writing to help them be successful. Since I enrolled in Lourdes Technology Masters Program, I have taken an interest in Web 2.0 technologies emerging in the field. Last summer I enrolled in Alan November’s November Learning Conference in Boston and redefined my entire attitude towards teaching. One of the presenters at the conference was Will Richardson, author of Blogs, Wikis and Podcasts for Educators. Richardson proposed an emerging world that Wiki Effect on Writing 3 no longer relied on textbooks and teacher centered learning, but instead exposed students to primary sources through the Internet and collaborative work through Web 2.0 technology. In EDU 613 Current and Emerging Technology in Education, we learned about some of the Web 2.0 technologies through WGTE included in their Build Your Own Website program. By instituting blogs through their program and reading Richardson’s book, I became fascinated with the idea of using wikis in education. In EDU 624 Web Based Instruction, we were required to create an annotated bibliography about one of the Web 2.0 technologies and I was able to focus on wiki use in the classroom. In EDU 626 Technology Management in Schools, we were exposed to guest speaker Cheryl Lykowski who discussed many of the educational leaders in Web 2.0 including Alan November and Will Richardson, which helped me formulate my topic: The Effect of Wiki Implementation on Writing Skills in Content Area Writing. In EDU 610 Learning Theory and Instruction, we were exposed to a constructivist method of instruction and wikis are technology that helps me incorporate constructivist methodology into my classroom. I introduced wikis into my class in the fall of 2007 and implemented many different assignments with varying levels of success. What impressed me most about the wiki was the quality and amount of writing students were willing to do as opposed to essays on tests or traditional papers. This study tests the validity of my observations of an increase of student writing in the content area through the use of a wiki. Wiki Effect on Writing 4 Definitions of Operational Terms Web 2.0 New emerging technologies found on the Internet that encourage collaboration and portability. A website that can be created easily and can be edited by many different users at once. An online journal that others can read and comment on. An online audio broadcast of information that can be downloaded and shared via portable music players. An online method of alerting users when web content has been changed or updated. The use of a password to edit a wiki. Method of calculating the grade level of text. It involves comparing the amount of words longer than six letters with the amount of sentences in 100 word passages. Method of calculating the grade level of text. It involves mathematical calculations involving the number of words, sentences and syllables in text. Method of calculating the grade level of text. It involves different mathematical calculations involving the number of words, sentences and syllables in text. Wiki Blog Podcast RSS (Real Simple Syndication) Soft Security Raygor Grade Level Flesh Kincaid Grade Level Flesh Kincaid Reading Ease Score Stating Limitations This study was done in the fall of 2008, with two American Government classes made up of primarily high school juniors. Our school relocated to a new building this school year and our technology department has been overwhelmed. Computers are not Wiki Effect on Writing 5 yet readily available. This had a huge impact in this study because I had planned on having the students familiarized with the basic publication skills, writing and research skills before the study took place. Unfortunately, I was only able to acquire computer access twice, the two minimal days necessary for the study. Even though the study was done in November, many of the students involved had never been on a computer at school and needed additional help logging in and setting their passwords. The first day I had the computers, five students were unable to log into them all day. The network at our school has been working intermittently, causing the two papers to happen in the same week. The original day I had the computers, the network was down all day and they were unusable. With only a single day to research, write and publish their writing, many students felt rushed and frustrated. Because of these conditions, students may have resorted to plagiarism in order to complete the assignment. Since this was the first time we had dealt with Internet research, many students did not understand the requirements necessary for a source to be looked at as scholarly and plagiarism was rampant. Employing a Google search showed many students plagiarized and these papers were not used in this study. Summary of Section 1 Since student writing is so important in today’s academic world, teachers need to use all the tools available to help students succeed. All teachers, regardless of content area, need to reinforce writing in their classroom. Wikis provide an authentic writing experience that increases student motivation. This study looked at how wiki implementation affects student writing. Students wrote a paper traditionally and another Wiki Effect on Writing 6 one for wiki publication. The results are compared to see if wiki publication increases the quality of student work. Wiki Effect on Writing 7 Section II: The Review of Literature Introduction The purpose of this study is to see if student writing published on a wiki is of better quantity and quality than student writing published simply for a teacher. Students composed two pieces of written work, one for wiki publication and one graded solely by the teacher. This section will present a review of literature that is relevant to the study. The specific areas of this review of literature include: • What are Wikis and How Are They Being Used in Education? • Benefits and Dangers of Using Wikis in Education • Research on the Decline of Writing Skills • Research on Wikis Improving Student Writing What are Wikis and How Are They Being Used in Education? Wikis are part of the emerging Web 2.0 technology that has emerged in today’s world. David (2007) defines the term “Web 2.0” as a “generation of web based offerings…designed to foster collaboration and encourage interactive activities” (p. 64). Web 2.0 technologies include photo and video sharing devices, podcasting, wikis, blogs, as well as other social software. Social bookmarking is a tool that allows users to share bookmarks with others and utilize them from any computer. Harvard Law School utilizes this type of technology to drive their new collaborative project entitled “H20.” H20 allows scholars to look at playlists and find lists of readings and other educational resources. The code is open, meaning that it is editable by anyone. YouTube allows video to be viewed by any computer. Duke University has initiated the Duke Digital Initiative where every student receives an Apple iPod. They have created a podcasting tool called Wiki Effect on Writing 8 Dukecast and a classroom capture tool called Lectopia to integrate the technology into their community. Stanford University implements Apple’s iTunes U, a service that allows universities to create a site that students can download video and audio content related to class. The University of California, Berkeley also uses iTunes U, but they have become the first school to have their own Google Video site. Currently Berkeley has six entire courses on Google Video. Anyone can view this material, not just Berkeley students. Wikis are popular because they allow collaboration powered by just a web browser, no special software is needed. The term wiki is Hawaiian and means quick. Wikipedia is the best known example of a wiki. One area of Wikipedia of particular use to educators is a section called the Wikipedia School and University Projects Page that allows teachers and professors to incorporate the encyclopedia into their class. “It’s a win-win situation. Students improve their writing skills while advancing their knowledge in areas such as editing and publishing” (p. 67). Besides writing and editing, students learn valuable collaboration skills from working with other editors. Education needs to incorporate these new technologies because they are already in use in the business world. Businesses are using their online presence for support, attracting customers, making money, and completing project work. Driscoll (2007) observes that Web 2.0 technologies are opening up new doors for education. Online learning communities are emerging allowing for enriched education to occur in today’s classrooms. Web 2.0 technologies are used by educators in three different ways; presentation, interaction and collaboration. The new technology has been able to infiltrate schools because it is easy to learn and affordable. Web 2.0 technology is allowing educators to remove the walls of the traditional classroom and communicate Wiki Effect on Writing 9 with people all over the world. Driscoll believes the strength of wiki technology is in its collaborative aspects, allowing groups of students to work together editing and creating each others’ work. Another feature of wikis is that student work is published online and is available for future study. Driscoll continues by discussing many of the other Web 2.0 tools and giving examples of how to use them. The article concludes by stating that student motivation is greatly enhanced with the application of these technologies in the classroom. So what makes wikis different from other Web 2.0 technologies? Lamb and Johnson (2007) explain that Wikis have five characteristics that make them stand out; they are unique, collaborative, employ open editing, utilize simple coding and are continuously evolving. Different wikis are created for different purposes and differ by topic and audience. Wikis can be used in education to allow students to participate in true collaborative writing. “Wikis provide an opportunity to synthesize ideas and create a collaborative project that is broader, deeper, and more interconnected than that created in a traditional writing environment” (p. 3). Different ways wikis can be used in education include collaborative problem solving, collaborative research, collaborative writing, dynamic journal or notebook, electronic portfolio, portal, resource aggregator, study guide and virtual conferencing. Guhlin (2008) looks at how wikis can be used in education. “Technology’s power is no longer just in making information available. Rather the power to write ideas, share information and allow reflections to be published at will makes the difference” (p. 8). An additional tool that can be used with a wiki is RSS (Real Simple Syndication) feeds. These feeds allow people to be alerted when a change has been made to a wiki. Different Wiki Effect on Writing 10 ways Guhlin suggests of using wikis include agenda planning, aggregating team information, collaborative document development, document management, grant planning and writing and equalizing input. Oatman (2005) explores the possibilities of wiki use in the classroom. Wikis are being used at Grandview Elementary in Monsey, New York in a third grade classroom to help students hone their writing skills. A specific project involves using a wiki to write for a school newspaper. Bud Hunt at Olde Columbine High School in Longmount Colorado uses wikis to help teach writing and noticed that “the quality of writing across the board was better than any of the work they had done previously…..I think it was because the students had an authentic audience” (p. 52). The state of Virginia has embraced wiki technology and have an initiative to train all K-12 teachers and librarians so that they will be wiki literate. Different wiki sites are available for educator use including editme, courseforum, pbwiki, jotspot and seedwiki. Each site has different features and pricing. Oatman references the debate about the validity of the most famous wiki, Wikipedia and explains that many schools are reexamining how to use the source for educational purposes. The benefits of using wikis in education include cooperation skills, student centered learning, and the international scope of communicating on the Internet. Oatman ends by exploring why education has been relatively slow to embrace wiki technology and concludes that educators are overly cautious about new technology and need to be trained. Siegle (2008) explains that today’s wiki editing was envisioned by Timothy John Berners-Lee, developer of the Netscape web browser, who attempted to include it in Netscape as Netscape Composer. This idea of allowing others to edit web pages did not Wiki Effect on Writing 11 become popular until Wikipedia exposed the potential of the technology. Wiki technology allows teachers the ability to teach in a much more constructivist way. One of wiki’s best advantages is that it can be viewed and edited from anywhere as long as the user knows the password. They give students a place to share their work, and teachers and parents can communicate through them as well. Siegle continues by offering suggestions on how educators can utilize wikis in their classrooms such as first day get to know me activities, electronic portfolios, planning of projects or field trips, creating web pages on a topic studied, researching project, peer editing of writing, creating online reports with media, reassessing what students know as well as post assessing what they have learned, creating test study guides, creating calendars for scheduling and time management skills, updating calendars for parent communication and class absences, enabling a chat for office hours to help struggling students, and implementing independent student special interest wikis. Siegle warns that wikis group students and considerations need to be made for different learning levels and speeds. Siegle continues by explaining how to set up a wiki using pbwiki. It is recommended that educators make their wikis private and invite people in by giving out the password as opposed to making it public so that everyone can see it. Students are held accountable because they are tracked and a record is kept as to when they were on the wiki and what they did while they were there. Wikis can also be reverted to an earlier save in case of accidental erasure or student misbehavior. Siegle believes that using Wikipedia for research is a problem. Students need to be taught to triangulate their information and investigate their sources. Achterman (2006) offers more examples of how wikis and blogs are being used in the classroom. Blogs can be used to create online reading circles that allow discussion of Wiki Effect on Writing 12 literature by students in a format that they are comfortable with. There are a variety of websites containing blogs that are dedicated to education including www.edublogs.org. Wikipedia is an example of a wiki, but can be misleading to novices who think that Wikipedia is all that wikis can do. Wikis allow teachers to create both linear and nonlinear assignments through the use of links, allow a multitude of grouping possibilities, help with organization, document sources, linking place for primary sources, and a classroom discussion space. Students can access wikis from anywhere at any time. A specific example is given where an English teacher created an assignment that had students create pro and con pages and online graphic organizers that linked to their sources to help create a controversial issues paper. Achterman concludes with a list of free Web 2.0 tools for educators to use. Mills (2007) warns educators to be aware that Web 2.0 technologies are in a constant state of flux. Web 2.0 technologies are not software based, but based “on practices such as sharing thoughts and information through self-publishing and harnessing the collective intelligence of all users to generate information and solve problems” (p. 4). Mills believes that as soon as educators gain an understanding of the new current technologies, there will be some new technology being put into place. School employees need to familiarize themselves with the Web 2.0 tools as an important first step. Mills suggests editing a Wikipedia entry or starting a blog with RSS feeds for the district. This will help signal to the students and the public that the school is adapting and incorporating the new technology. Schools also need properly administrated professional development programs that create school wide plans for adding Web 2.0 tools into the classroom. “While Web 2.0 applications offer opportunities for expanding student and Wiki Effect on Writing 13 teacher interactions, acceptable use and security policies will likely need updating” (p. 5). Web 2.0 technologies have initiated a technology revolution that has influenced Presidential candidates to establish MySpace pages, which in turn will impact the landscape of today’s schools. Richardson (2006) dedicates an entire chapter of his book Blogs, Wikis, Podcasts, and Other Powerful Web Tools for Classrooms to wikis. The chapter starts with a review of Wikipedia. Wikipedia’s accuracy was tested by an experiment by University of Buffalo Professor Alex Halavais who posted thirteen errors on Wikipedia and watched as they were all fixed within a matter of hours. Another study compared Wikipedia entries and the same topics in Encyclopedia Brittanica and found Wikipedia almost the same quality. Wikipedia can be added into the classroom by adopting a weak page and having students research the topic and add their research and documentation to it. Wikis challenge traditional ideas about copyright and intellectual property because of their collaborative nature. Wiki can be protected with passwords called soft security. Using wikis in the classroom changes the role of the teacher from traditional content provider to connector, content creator, collaborator, coach, and change agent. Wiki posting forces students to first read critically to see if their ideas have already been posted, edit what is already there and interact with other writers, all higher level thinking activities. Richardson finishes the chapter showing teachers how to set up a wiki using www.pbwiki.com. Benefits and Dangers of Using Wikis in Education Wiki Effect on Writing 14 As with all educational formats, Wiki use has many benefits and pitfalls. Richardson (2005) investigates the new tools of the Read/ Write web including blogs, wikis and RSS (Really Simple Syndication) feeds. “Classrooms are beginning to feel these effects as well, as thousands of teachers and students use the Web to publish their work, collaborate on projects, and engage in online conversations” (p. 24). Richardson presents wikis as a way for students to collaborate by posting information, viewing the work of the peers and editing it. “Students and teachers in classes ranging from media studies to physics are collaboratively building their own wikis that feature lists of annotated resources and links relevant to the course curriculum that can be shared with future classes” (p. 25). Teachers not only need to learn about the new technologies, they also need to learn how to effectively implement them. “Adjusting to the Read/ Write Web is not as simple as moving students from writing essays on paper to writing essays on a blog. Teachers and students must learn to navigate the complexities that accompany a publishing environment that is more transparent, interactive, and collaborative than ever before” (p. 26). Also there is trend of a shifting role for teachers changing from the traditional “content expert” to facilitator; “the teacher’s role shifts from a content expert to a guide who shows students how to find and evaluate online resources, communicate with experts whom they encounter online, and publish their own creations that result from such encounters” (p. 27). Richardson warns of the dangers of the Read/ Write Web to education and suggests that, “Schools need to think through the potential privacy and safety implications that go along with widespread publishing of student-created content” (p. 27). Wiki Effect on Writing 15 Richardson (2007) revisits the Read/Write Web and how it impacts education. Wikis are used to create online textbooks and resource centers. Communication with parents and students is enhanced as well as allowing students to have a digital record of their work. There is a shift from traditional classroom teaching where the teacher teaches knowledge, to a world where knowledge is easily found through the Internet and teachers teach students how to decipher it. Textbooks are in danger of becoming outdated. With the addition of RSS feeds, students are able to have new content delivered to their email instead of having to seek out website updates. Educators now have the ability to directly connect students with primary sources such as authors and people from other countries. Education needs to become a player in students’ use of the Read/Write Web so that students learn the proper way to evaluate sources and publish work all while maintaining their privacy and safety. Research on the Decline of Writing Skills High School student writing skills have been under fire from the media and higher education. There is a national push to investigate how to better prepare today’s students writing skills for success. Gold (2005) investigates the history of attacks on student writing and comes up with the conclusion that “instead of complaining about kids today, let’s try teaching them” (p. 793). Gold traces current attacks all the way back to attacks from the 19th century. Gold evaluates the writing skills of the attackers and finds their writing flawed because of the use of unsupported evidence. He compares student writing samples from all areas and comes to the conclusion that student writing has not declined in recent years. Wiki Effect on Writing 16 One of the researchers Gold studied was Hirsch. Hirsch (1983) contends that student’s decline in literacy is reflected by documented decreasing SAT scores. In the 19th century, English was taught using a national curriculum. However in Hirsch’s study, new regional English curricula did not measure up to century old standards. Hirsch did a study of two groups of 100 readers to find out if well written papers would increase readingspeed and comprehension when compared to poorly written papers, and found out that this was indeed the case. He studied a group of Indian students and American students and found that background knowledge also played into reading speed and comprehension because the Indian students understood a letter about an Indian wedding better than a letter on an American wedding, and American students understood the American wedding letter better. Hirsh recommended that in order to improve reading and writing skills, we would have to abandon current educational thought and practice. Jameson (2007) interprets the decline of student writing skills differently. Evidence on student writing abilities is complex, ranging from college faculty complaints about student ability to nationwide writing assessments and different interpretations of them. Jameson studied statistics to see if the public perception of a decline in student writing skills could be backed up by data. The study examined the scores of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) for the last twenty five years. The NAEP study concluded that 25% of high schools seniors have the required writing ability necessary at the college level. The NAEP tests also test reading levels and concluded that only 40% of high school seniors had the reading level required at the college level. Jameson also looked at the results of the Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT). The study found that although SAT scores had declined significantly since World War II, they Wiki Effect on Writing 17 have remained relatively stable since 1980. In 2005, the SAT added a mandatory writing section to help adequately test students writing ability. Jameson hypothesizes that scores have remained stable. Since there is a larger population going to college, the percentage not doing well is the same, resulting in numbers that are larger. Other factors that contribute to the large amount of ill-prepared college students are the decline of high school students taking composition classes, decline in amount of homework given, increase in grades given for work, unsubstantiated confidence, decrease in reading for pleasure and changing leisure activities. Jameson recommends that innovative techniques be employed to help low-level writers make up for their lack of ability. Higher education needs to maintain current standards of admissions and weaker students need more intervention. Literacy in the United States has remained constant the last twenty five years; and no improvement has been made with any new educational innovations. Jameson feels this is because of the social and cultural restraints being placed on schools and educators alike. Research on Wikis Improving Student Writing The specific topic of this study deals with wiki implementation and its impact on writing within the content area. McPherson (2006) studies how wikis are currently being used in education. Students are able to converse and share ideas with virtually anyone. “Knowing that real people will be reading and possibly responding to their writing is often the impetus to motivate students to write with much more enthusiasm than they would when composing traditional research essays, in which the classroom teacher or Wiki Effect on Writing 18 teacher-librarian is the only audience” (p. 1). McPherson identified another benefit wikis provide; the power of student collaboration. “Writing entries in a wiki demands that students be taught writing skills that emphasize negotiation, cooperation, collaboration, and respect for one another’s work and thoughts” (p. 2). Not only are collaborative skills taught through wiki use, but “several students learned effective writing strategies and grammar from other students” (p. 2). The ability to add more than just text such as pictures, music, graphics, video, photos and hyperlinks helps nonlinear thinkers organize their work, allowing “students opportunities to express themselves using multiple modalities” (p. 2). Drawbacks to wiki use include reinforcing the use of less formal writing that may work against student learning. Another problem is that students may be unfamiliar with collaborative writing necessitating the need for more instruction and classroom rules. With the proper instruction, however, McPherson suggests that “wikis may very well be the literacy technology that helps many of our current students learn to be effective writers” (p. 4). Read (2005) describes the pitfalls of using technology in a class on Romantic Poetry using traditional web technology including having to learn HTML code. With wiki technology, students can spend their class time learning about poetry instead of how to post on the Internet. Read investigates a Romantic Poetry class taught by Mark Phillipson at Bowdoin College. In the wiki set up for the course, students have created a reflection on poetry that includes links to pages on different aspects of the imagery. Phillipson has eliminated the status quo five page essays and relies totally on the class wiki for credit. Read continues by stating that Wikis need to be carefully monitored; the Los Angeles Times had to shut down their editorial wiki in three days because of Wiki Effect on Writing 19 inappropriate comments and pictures. Phillipson claims that the wiki has helped him create a sense of community in the class that he could not achieve traditionally. Writing for a wiki is a different new skill. It forces students to write in short compact form. Read references Mr. Morgan of Bemidji State who uses wikis to reinforce traditional types of writing. Morgan feels that students are much more willing to edit their work using a wiki as opposed to traditional software such as Microsoft Word. Read considers the work of Matt Bowden who uses wikis as a communal writing project. Bowden publishes ideas he is frustrated with and allows others to share ideas and input. Farabaugh (2007) uses wiki technology to help students understand the intricacies of Shakespeare. Farabaugh discusses how wikis reinforce the “Writing to Learn” movement initiated by Emig in 1977. This movement was based on the merging of the theories of Bruner, Luria and Yudovich and Vygotsky that concludes that there is a link between learning and language. The University of Maryland, Baltimore County Wiki Group (UMBC) claims that wiki technology is the most innovative resource yet introduced for online writing. Farabaugh discusses what a wiki is and explains that wikis need to be password protected for classroom use. Commercial coursework management program Blackboard has added wikis into its structure, but Farabaugh does not recommend using it because it limits what can be done in the classroom. UMBC feels that wiki use has helped them fit the needs of their diverse population, made up of many different ethnic groups in different stages of their lives. Farabaugh has used wikis for four semesters to help students discover the meaning conveyed by metaphor. “Shakespeare’s first eighteen sonnets are linked through imagery, theme, logic and sound. Thus, they provided a text that naturally encourages making connections by the reader, and presents Wiki Effect on Writing 20 transformation of ideas as the sonnets progress” (p. 46). Students create a wiki that links the different sonnets together using hyperlinks to other student’s pages. Student writing for wiki pages can be less formal than traditional methods; however, the ease of editing associated with wikis allows students to refine and formalize their work. The Shakespeare class evolved so that the main use of the wiki was process writing instead of culminating writing. After posting comments on the wiki, students took the thoughts and comparisons and turned them into a formal eight page paper. In another class, Shakespeare on Film, Farabaugh wanted to utilize the wiki not only for process writing, but to create a formal online paper. As students posted to the wiki, Farabaugh would edit the posts and leave comments in italics. As a result, Farabaugh found that “the entries grew longer and more detailed as the course progressed” (p. 52). Writing out ideas on the wiki within a community of classmates appears to have lead to the discovery of larger questions, metaquestions if you will, about the nature of form and its ability to convey meaning. We may recall the concept of ‘scaffolding’, and Vygotsky’s idea of deliberate semantics, and say that using the wiki prompted students to write their ideas down, to give those ideas connection and structure through the arrangement and creation of linked pages as those ideas grew. (Farabaugh. p. 54) This conclusion supports the hypothesis that wikis can be used to enhance the quality of student writing. There were some small obstructions that had to be overcome when using the wiki such as old student computers that needed to be upgraded and the use of unstable wiki software. These setbacks were overcome and Farabaugh concludes that wiki technology can be used “to mimic the process of discovery or analysis one wishes to teach” (p. 55). Wiki Effect on Writing 21 Section III: Methodology Identification of the Knowledge Base The purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of the Web 2.0 technology wiki and see if implementation of a wiki in a Social Studies classroom helps increase the quantity and quality of student writing. Research gained from this study supported the hypothesis that Wiki publication of high school written work increases both the quantity and quality of the work. This section describes the procedures that were implemented during the study. Methods and Procedures for Data Collection Utilized During the Study Students between the ages of fifteen to eighteen in two American Government classes at a career center located in Northwest Ohio completed two written essays. One of the assignments was a traditional written essay composed by the students, graded by the teacher and handed back in the classroom. The other assignment was published on the class wiki so that other people besides the teacher are able to view the students’ work. The two different classes did the assignments in different orders. Class “C” did the wiki assignment first and class “D” did the wiki assignment second. Both writing assignments had similar directions; however they addressed different topics. Students in class “C” published a wiki article consisting of three paragraphs and three sources on a Supreme Court Case. Students in class “D” published a wiki article consisting of three paragraphs and three sources on a United States President. These topics were flipped for the written Wiki Effect on Writing 22 assignment. Students were given an assigned number to post writing to the wiki to protect their anonymity. Methods and Procedures of Analyses to be Used When the assignments were completed, the number of words in each written work was recorded. Each essay was examined using the Raygor Readability Test (McKenna and Robinson, 1997, p. 47), the Flesh Kincaid Readability tests and the Flesh Kincaid Reading Ease Score provided in Microsoft Word. These scores were compared and evaluated for correlation. Each essay was Google-edited for plagiarism to ensure that the writing was indeed the student’s own. Plagiarized work was dropped from the study. The essays were also graded with a rubric and the grades were compared for correlation. Timeline Wiki Effect on Writing 23 Section IV: The Results Introduction The purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of the Web 2.0 technology wiki and see if implementation of a wiki in a Social Studies classroom helps increase the quantity and quality of student writing. Research gained from this study supports the hypothesis that wiki publication of high school written work increases the quantity and quality of the work. This section describes the results and findings of the study. Narrative In November 2008, students in two different American Government classes participated in the study. On Tuesday, students in the class labeled C were given a law brief assignment to be posted on a wiki, while students in the class labeled D were given the same assignment to be handed in as a written paper. The analysis of these activities is presented in tables one and two. On Thursday, students in the “C” class were given a similar assignment on an American president to be handed in as a written paper, while the students in the “D” class were given the same president assignment to post to the class wiki. The analysis of these activities is presented in tables three and four. Student work from the “C” class wiki assignment resulted in eighteen out of twenty one students completing the assignment. The average word count of the students’ work was 168.71. The average Raygor grade level was 9.23. The average Flesh Kincaid grade level was 11. The average Flesh Kincaid Reading ease score was 47.26. The average class grade was 38.07 out of 50. The average grade percentage was 76.14%. Wiki Effect on Writing 24 Table 1. Class “C” wiki assignment results. Flesh Flesh Kincaid Grade Kincaid Reading Given / Grade Ease 50 Grade Level Score Points Percentage 13 42 28 56% 13 50 41 82% 9 63 40 80% 12 33.6 10 20% 8 62 48 96% 11 51 47 94% 9 55 44 88% 9 53 48 96% 9 57 32 64% 8 66 38 76% 17 33 48 96% 11 32 31 62% 13 21 28 56% 12 43 50 100% Average Average Flesh Flesh Kincaid Kincaid Reading Grade Ease Average Average Level Score Grade Percentage 11 47.26 38.07 76.14% Student C1 C3 C5 C6 C7 C8 C12 C13 C17 C19 C20 C21 C22 C23 Word Count 139 100 302 15 149 262 139 217 127 272 128 124 100 288 Raygor Grade Level 11 9 4 Invalid 9 10 8 8 9 6 12 8 14 12 Average Average Words Raygor 168.71 9.23 Wiki Effect on Writing 25 Table 2. Class “D” written assignment results. Flesh Flesh Kincaid Grade Kincaid Reading Given / Grade Ease 40 Grade Level Score Points Percentage 13 42 33 82.50% 13 48 31 77.50% 14 40 40 100.00% 12 47 40 100.00% 10 58 24 60.00% 10 49 38 95.00% 9 57 18 45.00% 8 56 11 27.50% 12 38 25 62.50% 10 48 27 67.50% Average Average Flesh Flesh Kincaid Kincaid Reading Grade Ease Average Average Level Score Grade Percentage 11.10 48.30 28.70 71.75% Student D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8 D17 D18 D20 Word Count 257 168 263 265 129 124 165 60 126 125 Raygor Grade Level Invalid 11 10 8 9 10 11 6 13 10 Average Average Words Raygor 168.20 9.78 Wiki Effect on Writing 26 Student work from the “D” class written assignment resulted in fifteen out of fifteen students completing the assignment. The average word count of the students’ work was 168.20 words. The average Raygor grade level was 9.78. The average Flesh Kincaid grade level was 11.10 and the average Flesh Kincaid Reading Ease score was 48.30. The average class grade was 71.75%. Student work from the class “C” written assignment resulted in sixteen out of twenty one students completing the assignment. The average word count of the students’ work was 187.93 words. The average Raygor grade level was 8.33. The average Flesh Kincaid grade level was 9.43 and the average Flesh Kincaid Reading Ease score was 49.93. The average class grade was 79.46%. Student work from the class “D” wiki assignment resulted in all fifteen students completing the assignment. The average word count was 245.30 words. The average Raygor Grade Level was 9.60. The average Flesh Kincaid Grade Level was 9.10 and the average Flesh Kincaid Reading Ease score 51.30. Table 5 shows the percentage of students caught plagiarizing. In class “C”, four students plagiarized on the wiki assignment representing 14.29% of the population. Two students plagiarized on the written assignment representing 9.52% of the population. In class “D”, five students plagiarized on both the wiki assignment and the written assignment representing 33.33% of the population. Wiki Effect on Writing 27 Table 3. Class “C” written assignment results. Flesh Flesh Kincaid Grade Kincaid Reading Given / Grade Ease 40 Grade Level Score Points Percentage 9 52 38 95.00% 10 53 40 100.00% 10 44 13 32.50% 6 64 21 52.50% 10 46 25 62.50% 10 49 40 100.00% 9 51 30 75.00% 11 36 28 70.00% 11 47 30 75.00% 9 53 38 95.00% 11 38 34 85.00% 7 60 34 85.00% 9 51 40 100.00% 10 55 34 85.00% Average Average Flesh Flesh Kincaid Kincaid Reading Grade Ease Average Average Level Score Grade Percentage 9.43 49.93 31.79 79.46% Student C1 C2 C3 C5 C6 C7 C8 C12 C13 C16 C19 C20 C21 C22 Word Count 231 285 87 106 105 345 171 109 180 282 198 160 200 172 Raygor Grade Level 8 8 Invalid 5 5 9 7 Invalid 12 7 12 10 10 7 Average Average Words Raygor 187.93 8.33 Wiki Effect on Writing 28 Table 4. Class “D” wiki assignment results. Flesh Flesh Kincaid Grade Kincaid Reading Given / Grade Ease 50 Grade Level Score Points Percentage 9 49 40 80.00% 11 45 50 100.00% 10 48 50 100.00% 8 58 45 90.00% 9 55 47 94.00% 10 47 50 100.00% 8 53 46 92.00% 8 60 48 96.00% 9 47 50 100.00% 9 51 47 94.00% Average Average Flesh Flesh Kincaid Kincaid Reading Grade Ease Average Average Level Score Grade Percentage 9.10 51.30 47.30 94.60% Student D2 D3 D5 D6 D7 D8 D14 D17 D18 D20 Word Count 243 250 238 349 383 321 171 221 148 129 Raygor Grade Level 12 10 8 8 10 9 13 8 10 8 Average Average Words Raygor 245.3 9.60 Wiki Effect on Writing 29 Table 6 shows the percentage of students who did not complete the assignment. In class “C”, three students chose not to do the wiki assignment representing 14.29% of the population. Five students chose not to do the written assignment representing 23.81% of the population. In class “D”, all of the students did both assignments. Table 7 shows the difference between the wiki and written assignments in class “C”. On average, students wrote 19.22 words less on the wiki than they did on the written assignment. The average Raygor Grade Level increased .90 grades on the wiki assignment. The average Flesh Kincaid Grade Level increased 1.57 grades on the wiki as well. The average Flesh Kincaid Reading Ease score was lower by 2.67 on the written assignment and the average grade percentage was 3.32% higher on the written assignment. Table 8 shows the difference between the wiki and written assignments in class “D”. Students wrote an average 77.10 more words on the wiki assignment then they did on the written assignment. The average Raygor Grade Level decreased .18 grade levels on the wiki assignment when compared to the written assignment. The Average Flesh Kincaid Grade Level decreased by 2.00 grades on the wiki assignment. The Average Flesh Kincaid Reading Ease Score increased on the wiki by 3.00. The average grade percentage was 22.85% higher on the wiki assignment compared to the written assignment. Wiki Effect on Writing 30 Table 5. Average Plagiarism by Assignment C Wiki 19.05% D Written 33.33% C Written 9.52% D Wiki 33.33% Table 6. Percent of Students who did not Complete Assignment C Wiki 14.29% D Written 0.00% C Written 23.81% D Wiki 0.00% Table 7. Wiki/ Written Comparison “C” Class Average Average Flesh Average Flesh Kincaid Average Raygor Kincaid Reading Average Word Grade Grade Ease Grade Count Level Level Score Percentage 168.71 9.23 11.00 47.26 76.14% 187.93 8.33 9.43 49.93 79.46% -19.22 0.90 1.57 -2.67 -3.32% Assignment Wiki Written Wiki Compared to Written Table 8. Wiki/Written Comparison “D” Class Average Average Flesh Average Flesh Kincaid Average Raygor Kincaid Reading Average Word Grade Grade Ease Grade Count Level Level Score Percentage 245.3 9.60 9.10 51.30 47.30% 168.20 9.78 11.10 48.30 28.70% 77.10 -0.18 -2.00 3.00 22.85% Assignment Wiki Written Wiki Compared to Written Wiki Effect on Writing 31 Table 9 compares the final results of both classes. Publishing work on the wiki decreased the average word count of class “C” by 19.22, but increased the average word count of class “D” by 77.10. Wiki publication increased the average Raygor Grade Level of class “C” .90 while it decreased the Average Raygor Grade Level by .18. Student publication to the wiki increased the average Flesh Kincaid Grade level in class “C” 1.57 grades, while it decreased the average Flesh Kincaid Grade level in class “D” 2.00 grades. The Average Flesh Kincaid Reading Ease Score dropped in class “C” 2.67 while it raised in class “D” 3.00. The average grade percentage earned in class “C” dropped with wiki publication 3.32% while it rose 22.85% in class “D”. Wiki Effect on Writing 32 Table 9. Final Average Wiki/Written Comparison of Both Classes Average Flesh Kincaid Grade Level 1.57 -2.00 Average Flesh Kincaid Reading Average Ease Grade Score Percentage -2.67 -3.32% 3.00 22.85% Class C D Average Word Count -19.22 77.10 Average Raygor Grade Level 0.90 -0.18 Wiki Effect on Writing 33 Section V: The Importance Summary The purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of the Web 2.0 technology wiki and see if implementation of a wiki in a Social Studies classroom helps increase the quantity and quality of student writing. Students in two different sections of the same class were given the same assignment, but one class published their work on a wiki and the other handed their work in as a paper. The purpose of this section is to provide a summary of the results as well as a discussion about the findings. This section will also explore recommendations about personal development, further academic study and implications for future studies at Lourdes College. Discussion The results of this study revealed many items meriting discussion. The thesis that the publication on a wiki would increase student writing quantity and quality was only achieved in one of the classes. The class that published their work on the wiki first, called class “C”, actually had better results handing in a traditional paper. Average grades went from a 76.14% on the wiki assignment to a 79.46% on the paper. There was also a higher percentage of plagiarizing on the wiki, 19.05%, compared to 9.52% on the paper. However, participation on the wiki was higher at 85.71% compared to only 76.19% on the paper. Both Raygor and Flesh Kincaid grade levels also went up. Raygor was 8.33 on the paper and 9.23 on the wiki and Flesh Kincaid was 9.43 on the paper and 11 on the wiki. The class that turned in the paper first, called class “D” did much better on the wiki assignment. “D” completed both assignments with 100% participation and had the Wiki Effect on Writing 34 same amount of plagiarism with 33.33%. The average grade on the paper was a 71.75% while the average grade on the wiki was a 94.60%. Students only used an average of 168.20 words on their written paper but used 245.3 words on the wiki. The Raygor grade levels went down. Raygor went from 9.78 on the paper to 9.60 on the wiki. The Flesh Kincaid level decreased from 11.10 to 9.10. Discussion Linked to Study Rationale This study singled out an emerging web 2.0 technology, wikis, and looked at its implementation in the classroom in regards to impacting student writing. In the “D” class, student writing improved in both quantity, by an average 77.1 words, and quality, by 22.85% points. The difference for the “C” class was -19.22 words and -3.32% points. This study’s findings show that a wiki can be a viable tool to help students improve their writing skills. However, it is not a blanket “fix-all” and not only needs to be monitored, but wiki publication may not help all students. The wiki helped the students in the “D” class; however the “C” class was negatively impacted by the addition of the wiki. Just like other writing strategies, wikis should be introduced and used in class, not inclusively, but as a tool students and teachers can use and learn from. Discussion linked to Literature Review This study complimented Richardson’s (2007) idea of creating an online textbook. In the “C” class, each student was given an important Supreme Court case and they added their research to a page on the wiki to create an online “textbook.” The “D” class did a similar project except their online textbook was on Presidents of the United States. With enough technology access, Richardson’s idea of the traditional textbook may soon be outdated. This study was done with every student having their own password so Wiki Effect on Writing 35 that the teacher can track their movements and can hold each student accountable, eliminating the need for password “soft security” as discussed by Siegle (2008). This study followed Jameson’s (2007) thesis that increasing student writing skills needs to be addressed by educational innovations. Publishing student work on a wiki is one example of an educational innovation. Thus for class “D”, wiki writing shows a marked improvement in both their quantity and quality of writing. Student background knowledge may have unintentionally influenced the results of this study. Even though the two writing prompts were designed to be very similar, students at this age have more exposure to United States Presidents than Supreme Court cases. Hirsch (1983) found in his study of Indian and American students that reading speed and comprehension was increased as students were more familiar with the material. Hirsch hypothesized that background knowledge would also influence writing skills. This may explain how class “C” performed better on the written assignment. Implications: Discussion Linked to Practice and Professional Development The most revealing aspect of this study that will impact my teaching from now on was the prevalence of plagiarism in student writing. Class “C” had a 9.52% plagiarism rate on the paper and a 19.05% plagiarism rate on the wiki. Class “D” had a 33.33% plagiarism rate on both the paper and the wiki. As a result of these findings, I have added a plagiarism discussion at the beginning of any written work. It is my belief that the frequency of plagiarism may have skewed the study. To help monitor plagiarism, the wiki format was much more convenient to check because the work was saved electronically on the Internet. Wiki Effect on Writing 36 Another unintended finding this study alerted me to was the students’ lack of understanding what a scholarly website was. Even though wikipedia.com was strictly forbidden in the directions, many students continued to cite it as one of their sources. They cited answer.com, slideshare.net and a slew of other non-academic websites. Students had trouble understanding not only what an academic website was, but why they had to use them instead of easy to find encyclopedia sites. As a result, I have created a guide to help students determine if a website can be used for formal research or not. In the future I plan to continue utilizing the class wiki. In “C” participation went from 76.19% on the paper to 85.71% on the wiki. Class “D” had 100% participation on both assignments, but the increase in word count and grades leads me to believe that the wiki format is a more favorable activity. As computers become more available in our school, I plan on implementing more wiki based writing assignments. Implications: Recommendations for Study There are many recommendations brought to light as a result of this study. Further study is necessary on the prevalence and prevention of plagiarism in high school student writing. This study was conducted during a period of transition into a new facility, and a future study that would look at more wiki and paper assignments and comparisons is necessary to prove that wikis are beneficial to student writing. Many students in this study had not been on the school computers before and were not used to using them. Lack of computer access at our school made it difficult for the students to complete their research and writings and may have negatively impacted the results. For example, some students in the “C” class were unable to log on to the computers the entire day of the wiki Wiki Effect on Writing 37 assignment. Studies are necessary to compare the use of wikis to other web 2.0 technologies available such as blogs and social networking sites. In the secondary education scholarly community, studies need to be conducted to figure out what skills are necessary for today’s students to survive in Thomas Friedman’s “flat” world and what the best methods of instructing these skills to students are. Recommendations for Lourdes College Lourdes College needs to reexamine their decision to eliminate the technology cohort of their education program. Teachers in today’s society need to be well versed in teaching methodologies, discipline techniques and emerging technology. Schools are desperately in need of teachers who can integrate technology into their classrooms, not only to improve student content learning, but also to expose them to technology skills. The state of Ohio has created technology standards that schools are expected to follow. Having a technology cohort allows Lourdes College to continue researching new technology based teaching techniques that compliment the entire education program. As a result of this study, I believe Lourdes College should implement online programs that utilize wikis to help students and teachers learn about the pitfalls of online writing. Teachers need to be as savvy as students at new methods of information gathering so that they can guide students in the proper use of these amazing technologies. Lourdes needs to become a leader in technology skills to help further Northwest Ohio’s students’ technology and writing skills so that they will be better prepared for not only college, but various careers they choose to pursue. Lourdes College’s partnership with the WGTE education division should continue. WGTE’s offering, helping teachers design an online presence, complimented Wiki Effect on Writing 38 Lourdes’ EDU 613 Current and Emerging Technology in Education. The rigorous coursework of the Educational Technology program allowed me to formulate this study and implement this and other technologies into my classroom. This study compliments future studies investigating the link between technology and writing. Further research on classroom wiki implementation, technology based plagiarism, or increasing student writing research could benefit from this study’s results and findings, and continue Lourdes’ mission of adding to educational research in the future. Wiki Effect on Writing 39 References Achterman, D. (2006). Making Connections with Blogs and Wikis. CSLA Journal, 30(1), 29-31. Retrieved April 20, 2008, from Academic Search Primer database. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx? direct=true&db=aph&AN=22885750&loginpage=Login.asp&site=ehost-live David, C. (2007, April) Working With the Web. University Business, 10(4) 64-68. Retrieved April 10, 2008, from Academic Search Premier. Driscoll, K. (2007, May). Collaboration in Today’s Classrooms: New Web Tools Change the Game. Multimedia & Internet@Schools, 14(3), 9-12. Retrieved April 20, 2008, from Academic Search Primer database. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx? direct=true&db=aph&AN=25082726&loginpage=Login.asp&site=ehost-live Farabaugh, R. (2007, January 1) The Isle Is Full of Noises: Using Wiki Software to Establish a Discourse Community in a Shakespeare Classroom. Language Awareness, 16 (1) 41-56. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ759034) Retrieved April 10, 2008 from ERIC database. Gold, D. (2005, June). The Kids Are 'Alwrite'. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(10), 792-793. Retrieved April 20, 2008, from Academic Search Premier database. Guhlin, M. (2008, March). Wiki While You Work. School Administrator, 65(3), 8-8. Retrieved April 10, 2008, from Professional Development Collection database. Hirsch Jr., E. (1983, Spring). Cultural Literacy. American Scholar, 52(2), 159. Retrieved April 20, 2008, from Academic Search Premier database. Jameson, D. (2007, March). LITERACY IN DECLINE: UNTANGLING THE EVIDENCE. Business Communication Quarterly, 70(1), 16-33. Retrieved April 19, 2008, from Teacher Reference Center database. Lamb, A., & Johnson, L. (2007, June). an information skills workout: wikis and collaborative writing. Teacher Librarian, 34(5), 57-59. Retrieved April 10, 2008, from Academic Search Premier database. McKenna, M. & Robinson, R. (1997). Teaching Through Text: A Content Literacy Approach to Content Area Reading. New York: Longman Publishers USA. McPherson, K. (2006, December). wikis and student writing. Teacher Librarian, 34(2), 70-72. Retrieved April 10, 2008, from Academic Search Premier database. Wiki Effect on Writing 40 Mills, L. (2007, December). The Next Wave Now: Web 2.0. Education Digest, 73(4), 45. Retrieved March 27, 2008 from Professional Development Collection database. Oatman, E. (2005, November 1) make Way for Wikis. School Library Journal, 51(11ov) 52. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ786332) Retrieved March 27, 2008 from ERIC database. Read, B. (2005, July 15). Romantic Poetry Meets 21st-Century Technology. Chronicle of Higher Education, 51(45), A35-A36. Retrieved April 10, 2008, from Academic Search Premier database. Richardson, W., (2006). Blogs, Wikis, Podcasts, and Other Powerful Web Tools for Classrooms. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press. Richardson, W. (2005, December). The Educator's Guide to the Read/Write Web. Educational Leadership, 63(4), 24-27. Retrieved April 10, 2008, from Academic Search Premier database. Richardson, W. & Mancabelli, R. (2007). High-Tech Inspires the Read/ Write Website. Education Digest, 72(9), 14-18. Retrieved April 10, 2008, from Academic Search Primer database. http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=4&hid=16&sid=23776892-75be-49939fdd-1d558b0f37ab%40sessionmgr3 Siegle, D. (2008, Winter) Working With Wikis. Gifted Child Today, 31(1) 14 -17. Retrieved March 27, 2008, from Professional Development Collection database. Tapscott, D., & Williams, A. (2006). Wikinomics. City: Portfolio Hardcover. Ways to Wiki (2008, January/ February). BizEd, 7 (1) 30. Retrieved March 27, 2008 from Professional Development Collection database.