Vol. 33 No. 2 (2018)
Research Articles

Evaluating the Effectiveness of Academic Writing Interventions in a Community-Based B.Ed. Program

David Scott
University of Calgary (Werklund School of Education)
Amy Burns
University of Calgary (Werklund School of Education)
Patricia Danyluk
University of Calgary (Werklund School of Education)
Sam Ulmer-Krol
University of Calgary (Werklund School of Education)

Published 2018-12-27

Keywords

  • academic writing,
  • online learning,
  • rural teacher education

How to Cite

Scott, D., Burns, A., Danyluk, P., & Ulmer-Krol, S. (2018). Evaluating the Effectiveness of Academic Writing Interventions in a Community-Based B.Ed. Program. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education Revue Internationale Du E-Learning Et La Formation à Distance, 33(2). Retrieved from https://www.ijede.ca/index.php/jde/article/view/1060

Abstract

To address teacher retention in rural and remote areas, universities have begun to offer Bachelor of Education (B.Ed) programs to help people living in these communities gain their teacher certification. However, because many students who enrol in such programs have been out of school for many years, they often struggle with academic writing. Through student surveys and focus groups, along with instructor interviews, this design-based study sought to determine the extent to which technological supports and pedagogical techniques influenced the acquisition of academic writing skills for B.Ed. students within two online courses. Among the findings, students emphasized the importance of face-to-face interactions, particularly during their summer residency, to build the trust needed to provide authentic peer-to-peer feedback. They saw individual instructor formative feedback as having the most significant impact on their writing abilities. Although not originally intended as a writing intervention, students found ongoing discussion postings––albeit challenging and time consuming––as essential to the development of their academic writing abilities. Students appreciated the learning modules created for this course; however, their effect was mitigated by technical difficulties and a lack of teacher presence to provide guidance around how they could be best used. Recommendations include redesigning community-based B.Ed. programs to address writing skills, incorporate formative feedback structures, and provide scaffolding for writing and constructive peer feedback on discussion posts.

Keywords: academic writing, online learning, rural teacher education, teacher certification program

Résumé

Pour remédier au problème de rétention des enseignants dans les zones rurales et éloignées, les universités ont commencé à proposer des programmes de baccalauréat en éducation (B. Ed.) afin d’aider les personnes vivant dans ces communautés à obtenir leur brevet d’enseignement. Cependant, comme nombre d’étudiants qui s’inscrivent dans ces programmes ont quitté l’école depuis de nombreuses années, ils rencontrent de grandes difficultés concernant l’écriture académique. Cette recherche orientée par la conception (ROC) vise - via des enquêtes menées auprès des étudiants, des groupes de discussion et des entretiens avec les enseignants - à déterminer la mesure selon laquelle les dispositifs technologiques et les techniques pédagogiques influencent l’acquisition de compétences d’écriture académique des étudiants en B. Ed. dans le cadre de deux cours en ligne. Parmi les résultats, les étudiants ont souligné l’importance des interactions face à face, particulièrement pendant leur résidence d’été, en vue de construire la confiance nécessaire pour fournir des rétroactions authentiques entre pairs. Ils ont estimé que les rétroactions formatives individuelles de l’enseignant étaient celles ayant l’impact le plus significatif sur leurs compétences en termes d’écriture. Bien qu’ils n’aient originalement pas été pensés comme une intervention écrite, les étudiants ont trouvé que les échanges de messages ayant lieu – quoique difficiles et chronophages- étaient essentiels au développement de leurs compétences en écriture académique. Les étudiants ont apprécié les modules d’apprentissage créés pour ce cours; cependant, leur effet a été restreint par les difficultés techniques rencontrées et le manque de présence des enseignants pour leur indiquer comment s’en servir au mieux. Les recommandations comprennent la refonte des programmes du B. Ed. fondés sur une communauté pour aborder les compétences en écriture, intégrer des rétroactions formatives et fournir des structures favorisant l’écriture et les rétroactions constructives entre pairs sur les messages.

Mots-clés: écriture académique, apprentissage en ligne, formation des enseignants en milieu rural.

References

  1. Alberta Education. (2013). A transformation in progress: Alberta’s K–12 education workforce 2012/13. Edmonton, Canada: Author.
  2. Allen, M., & Tay, E. (2012). Wikis as individual student learning tools: The limitations of technology. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology, 8(2), 61-71. https://doi.org/10.4018/jicte.2012040105
  3. Allwardt, D. (2011). Writing with wikis: A cautionary tale of technology in the classroom. Journal of Social Work Education, 47(3), 597–605. https://doi.org/10.5175/JSWE.2011.200900126
  4. American Psychological Association. (2009). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
  5. Babcock, R., & Thonus, T. (2012). Researching the writing center. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
  6. Balzotti, J., & McCool, L. (2016). Using digital learning platforms to extend the flipped classroom. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 79(1), 68–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329490615606497
  7. Birch, H. J. S. (2016). Feedback in online writing forums: Effects on adolescent writers. Teaching/Writing: The Journal of Writing Teacher Education, 5(1), 74–89. Retrieved from https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/75571/1 /Feedback%20in%20Online%20Writing%20Forums.pdf
  8. Brown, A. L. (2014). Implementing active learning in an online teacher education course. American Journal of Distance Education, 28(3), 170–182. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2014.924695
  9. Calhoun, S., & Haley, J. (2003). Improving student writing through different writing styles. Chicago, IL: Saint Xavier University Press.
  10. Canter, L. L. S., Voytecki, K. S., & Rodríguez, D. (2007). Increasing online interaction in rural special education teacher preparation programs. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 26(1), 23–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/875687050702600104
  11. Černá, M. (2009). Blended learning experience in teacher education: The trainees’ perspective. Acta Didactica Napocensia, 2(1), 37-48. Retrieved from http://dppd.ubbcluj.ro/adn/article_2_1_5.pdf
  12. Chanock, K., D’Cruz, C., & Bisset D. (2009). Would you like grammar with that? Journal of Academic Language & Learning, 3(2), 1–12. Retrieved from http://journal.aall.org.au/index.php/jall/article/viewArticle/70
  13. Danyluk, P., & Sheppard, G. (2015). Preparing bachelor of education candidates to teach in Ontario’s northern, remote, First Nations, Métis and Inuit communities. Toronto, Canada: Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario. Retrieved from http://www.heqco.ca/SiteCollectionDocuments/FNMI%20ENG.pdf
  14. Dishaw, M., Eierman, M., Iversen, J., & Philip, G. (2011). Wiki or word? Evaluating tools for collaborative writing and editing. Journal of Information Systems Education, 22(1), 43–54. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ931449
  15. Dragon, K., Peacock, K., Norton, Y., Steinhauer, E., Snart, F., Carbonaro, M., & Boechler, P. (2012). Digital opportunities within the aboriginal teacher education program: A study of preservice teachers’ attitudes and proficiency in technology integration. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 58(2), 263–285. Retrieved from http://ajer.journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/ajer/article/view/1017
  16. Dupuy, R., Mayer, F., & Morisette, R. (2000). Rural youth: Stayers, leavers and return migrants: Report funded by the Canadian Rural Partnership and by the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency. Retrieved from the Statistics Canada website: http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/access_acces/archive.action?loc=/pub/11f0019m/0015 2/4193592-eng.pdf
  17. Eaton, S. E., Dressler, R., Gereluk, D., & Becker, S. (2015). A review of the literature on rural and remote pre-service teacher preparation with a focus on blended and e- learning models. Calgary, Canada: University of Calgary.
  18. Edginton, A., & Holbrook, J. (2010). A blended learning approach to teaching basic pharmacokinetics and the significance of face-to-face interaction. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 74(5), 1–11. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2907853/
  19. Ellis, M. J. (2011). Peer feedback on writing: Is on-line actually better than on-paper? Journal of Academic Language & Learning, 5(1), A88–A99. Retrieved from http://journal.aall.org.au/index.php/jall/article/view/130/96
  20. Engin, M., & Donanci, S. (2016). Instructional videos as part of a ‘flipped’ approach in academic writing. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: Gulf Perspectives, 13(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.18538/lthe.v13.n1.231
  21. Farrell, J., & Hartwell, A. (2008). Planning for successful alternative schooling: A possible route to education for all. Retrieved from the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization website: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0015/001598/159851e.pdf
  22. Faulk, N. (2010). Online teacher education: What are the results? Contemporary Issues in Education Research, 3(11), 21–28. Retrieved from https://www.cluteinstitute.com/ojs/index.php/CIER/article/download/243/233
  23. Gao, P. (2010). Enhance Preservice Teacher Learning in the Cohort Structured Blended Learning Environments. Paper presented at the Second International Conference on Education Technology and Computer (ICETC), Shanghai, China.
  24. Graham, S., Gillespie, A., & McKeown, D. (2012). Writing: Importance, development, and instruction. Reading and Writing, 26, 1–15. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s11145-012-9395-2
  25. Grant, A. C. (2010). Tearing down the walls: Creating global classrooms through online teacher preparation programs. Distance Learning, 7(2), 37–41. Retrieved from http://www.infoagepub.com/dl-issue.html?i=p54c116b086919
  26. Keyano College. (n.d.). Programs: Education. Retrieved from http://www.keyano.ca/Academics/Programs/Education
  27. McKenney, S., & Reeves, T. (2012). Conducting educational design research. Abingdon, IL: Routledge.
  28. Miles, M., Huberman, M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  29. Miller, N. C. (2012). Online teacher candidates’ experiences in a virtual world for the preparation to teach middle school (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (Order No. 3546554)
  30. Muirhead, W. D. (2000). Teachers’ perspectives of online education in Alberta. Edmonton, Canada: University of Alberta.
  31. Nandi, D., Hamilton, M., Chang, S., & Balbo, S. (2012). Evaluating quality in online asynchronous interactions between students and discussion facilitators. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(4), 684–702. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.835
  32. Napier, N. P., Dekhane, S., & Smith, S. (2011). Transitioning to blended learning: Understanding student and faculty perceptions. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 15(1), 20–32. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ918216.pdf
  33. Northern Alberta Development Council. (2010). Rural and remote education report. Retrieved from www.nadc.gov.ab.ca/Docs/rural-remote-education.pdf
  34. Ontario Ministry of Education. (2008). Teacher supply and demand survey report: Executive summary. Toronto, Canada: Author. Retrieved from http://www.edu .gov.on.ca/eng/policyfunding/memos/august2008/TeacherSurvey.pdf
  35. Queen’s University. (n.d.). Aboriginal teacher education program. Retrieved from http://educ.queensu.ca/atep
  36. Ravenna, G., Foster, C., & Bishop, C. (2012). Increasing student interaction online: A review of the literature. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 20(2), 177–203. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/35342/
  37. Saidy, C. (2015). We learned what? Pre-service teachers as developmental writers in the writing methods class. Teaching/Writing: The Journal of Writing Teacher Education, 4(1), 108–124. Retrieved from http://scholarworks.wmich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1119&context=wte
  38. Saskatchewan Learning. (2007). Educator supply and demand in Saskatchewan to 2011. Regina, Canada: Board of Teacher Education and Certification. Retrieved from http://www.skteacherbargaining.ca/storage/pdf/Educator_Supply_Demand_in_S K_to_2011.pdf
  39. Schön, D. A. (1987). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. San Francisco, CA: Basic Books.
  40. Schrum, L., Burbank, M. D., & Capps, R. (2007). Preparing future teachers for diverse schools in an online learning community: Perceptions and practice. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(3), 204–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2007.06.002
  41. Scott, D., Ribeiro, J., Burns, A., Danyluk, P., & Bodnaresko, S. (2017). A review of the literature on academic writing supports and instructional design approaches within blended and online learning environments. Calgary, Canada: University of Calgary. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/1880/51960
  42. Stetson, S. (2016). Building up to collaboration: Evidence on using wikis to scaffold academic writing. Journal of Academic Writing, 6(1), 134–144. https://doi.org/10.18552/joaw.v6i1.288
  43. Tuomainen, S. (2016). A blended learning approach to academic writing and presentation skills. International Journal on Language, Literature and Culture in Education, 3(2), 33–55. https://doi.org/10.1515/llce-2016-0009
  44. University of Saskatchewan. (n.d.). Northern teacher education program. Retrieved from http://www.usask.ca/programs/colleges-schools/education/northern-teacher-education-program-nortep/index.php
  45. Voegele, J. D. (2014). Student perspectives on blended learning through the lens of social, teaching, and cognitive presence. In A. G. Picciano, C. D. Dziuban, & C. R. Graham (Eds.), Blended learning: Research perspectives (Vol. 2; pp. 93–103). New York, NY: Routledge.
  46. Wang, F., & Hannafin, M. J. (2005). Design-based research and technology-enhanced learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 5-23. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504682
  47. West, E., & Jones, P. (2007). A framework for planning technology used in teacher education programs that serve rural communities. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 26(4), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/875687050702600402
  48. Wheeler, S., & Wheeler, D. (2009). Using wikis to promote quality learning in teacher training. Learning, Media and Technology, 34(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439880902759851
  49. Wijeyewardene, I., Patterson, H., & Collins, M. (2013). Against the odds: Teaching writing in an online environment. Journal of Academic Language & Learning, 7(2), A20–A34. Retrieved from http://journal.aall.org.au/index.php/jall/article/viewArticle/269
  50. Wingate, U., Andon, N., & Cogo, A. (2011). Embedding academic writing instruction into subject teaching: A case study. Active Learning in Higher Education, 12(1), 69–81. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787410387814
  51. Yang, Y., & Durrington, V. (2010). Investigation of students’ perceptions of online course quality. International Journal on E-Learning, 9(3), 341–361. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/29460/