Effects of composition mode and self-perceived computer skills on essay scores of sixth graders

Assessing Writing

Volumn 11, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 148-166

  Burke, Jennifer N ^a   Cizek, Gregory J ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

Composition mode; Computers; Word processing; Writing assessment

Indexed keywords

EID: 33947725178     PISSN: 10752935     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.asw.2006.11.003     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Alamargot D., and Chanquoy L. Through the models of writing (2001), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands
2. Bangert-Drowns R.L. The word processor as an instructional tool: A meta-analysis of word processing in writing instruction. Review of Educational Research 63 1 (1993) 69-93
3. Bereiter C., and Scardamalia M. The psychology of written composition (1987), Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ
4. Cizek G.J., and Page B.A. The concept of reliability in the context of automated essay scoring. In: Shermis M., and Burstein J. (Eds). Automated essay scoring: A cross-disciplinary perspective (2003), Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ 125-146
5. Cochran-Smith M. Word processing and writing in elementary classrooms: A critical review of related literature. Review of Educational Research 61 1 (1991) 107-155
6. Collier R., and Werier C. When computer writers compose by hand. Computers and Composition 12 (1995) 47-59
7. Flower L., and Hayes J.R. A cognitive process theory of writing. College and Composition 32 4 (1981) 365-387
8. Goldberg A., Russell M., and Cook A. The effect of computers on student writing: A meta-analysis of studies from 1992 to 2002. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment 2 1 (2003). http://www.jtla.org/ Retrieved from http://www.jtla.org
9. Grabe W., and Kaplan R.B. Theory and practice of writing: An applied linguistic perspective (1996), Addison-Wesley Longman, New York
10. Grejda G.F., and Hannafin M.J. Effects of word processing on sixth graders' holistic writing and revisions. Journal of Educational Research 85 3 (1992) 144-149
11. Grignon J.R. Computer experience of Menominee Indian students: Gender differences in coursework and use of software. Journal of American Indian Education 32 3 (1993) 1-15
12. Harrington S., Shermis M.D., and Rollins A.L. The influence of word processing on English placement test results. Computers and Composition 17 (2000) 197-210
13. Hayes J.R. A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing. In: Levy C.L., and Ransdell S. (Eds). The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences, and applications (1996), Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ 1-27
14. Kellogg R.T. A model of working memory in writing. In: Levy C.M., and Ransdell S. (Eds). The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences and applications (1996), Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ 57-71
15. Keogh T., Barnes P., Joiner R., and Littleton K. Gender, pair composition, and computer versus paper presentation of an English language task. Educational Psychology 20 (2000) 33-43
16. Kolen M.J., and Brennan R.L. Test equating: Methods and practices (1995), Springer, New York
17. McDonald A.S. The impact of individual differences on the equivalence of computer-based and paper-and-pencil educational assessments. Computers and Education 39 (2002) 299-312
18. Mead A.D., and Drasgow F. Equivalence of computerized and paper-and-pencil cognitive ability tests: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin 114 3 (1993) 449-458
19. Nichols L.M. Pencil and paper versus word processing: A comparative study of creative writing in the elementary school. Journal of Research on Computing in Education 29 2 (1996) 159-166
20. No Child Left Behind Act. (2001). P. L. 107-110, 20 U.S.C. 6301.
21. Powers D.E., Fowles M.E., Farnum M., and Ramsey P. Will they think less of my handwritten essay if others word process theirs? Effects on essay scores of intermingling handwritten and word-processed essays. Journal of Educational Measurement 31 3 (1994) 220-233
22. Russell M. Testing on computers: A follow-up study comparing performance on computer and on paper. Education Policy Analysis Archives 7 20 (1999). http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v7n20.html Retrieved March 2005, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v7n20.html
23. Russell M., and Haney W. Testing writing on computers: An experiment comparing student performance on tests conducted via computer and via paper-and-pencil. Education Policy Analysis Archives 5 3 (1997). http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v5n3.html Retrieved June 2004, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v5n3.html
24. Russell, M., & Plati, T. (2000, May 22). Mode of administration effects on MCAS composition performance for grades four, eight, and ten. A report of findings submitted to the Massachusetts Department of Education (World Wide Web Bulletin). Chestnut Hill, MA: National Board on Education Testing and Public Policy.
25. Russell, M., & Plati, T. (2001). Effects of computer versus paper administration of a state-mandated writing assessment. Teachers College Record. Retrieved June 2004, from http://www.tcrecord.org/Content.asp?ContentID=10709
26. Russell M., and Tao W. Effects of handwriting and computer-print on composition scores: A follow-up to Powers, Fowles, Farnum, & Ramsey. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation 9 1 (2004). http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp%3Fv=9%26n=1 Retrieved June 2004, from http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=9&n=1
27. Russell M., and Tao W. The influence of computer-print on rater scores. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation 9 10 (2004). http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp%3Fv=9%26n=10 Retrieved June 2004, from http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=9&n=10
28. Ruth L., and Murphy S. Designing topics for writing assessment: Problems of meaning. College Composition and Communication 35 (1984) 410-422
29. Shermis M., and Burstein J. Automated essay scoring: A cross-disciplinary perspective (2003), Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ
30. Weigle S. Assessing writing (2002), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
31. Wolfe E.W., and Manalo J.R. Composition medium comparability in a direct writing assessment of non-native English speakers. Language Learning & Technology 8 (2004) 53-65
32. Wolfe E.W., Bolton S., Feltovich B., and Niday D.M. The influence of student experience with word processors on the quality of essays written for a direct writing assessment. Assessing Writing 3 2 (1996) 123-147
33. Wolfe E.W., Bolton S., Feltovich B., and Welch C. A comparison of word-processed and handwritten essays from a standardized writing assessment. ACT Research (1993) 93-98