Board Meeting: June

Dear Board Members,

I want to thank you for allowing us to present at the May Board Meeting.  It was a rewarding experience for all of us. 

I do want to share that I regret concluding so quickly.  In my haste, due to our technical issues, I might not have concluded as thoughtfully as I would have liked.

So, here is my more thoughtful conclusion:

As explained in my Review of the Literature in my final study analysis, the research does show that using technology in the classroom does improve learning on many different levels.  In Chapter Two, page 5, of my study proposal:  Writing Blogs:  Using Blogs to Increase Writing Skills in Middle School English/Language Arts Students  this is evident. 

However, due to the key implications of my research study, improvement was inconclusive.  The implications were:

1. The pretest and the posttest that I used were not meaningful.  As this was my first research study, and due to my inexperience, I essentially used an incorrect pretest and posttest.  As baseline data (pretest), I used the students’ most recent cardmarking grades, which is an assessment of language arts curriculum – not writing, specifically.  I did the same for the posttest.  While doing the study, and while reading and assessing writing samples each week, it occurred to me that I should have used a simple writing sample for the pre and posttest data.  If I had, the pretest and posttest would have more accurately measured writing growth, which is what I had intended.  In effect, I was assessing writing growth with cardmarking grades vs a writing sample, which inevitable caused my study to be unreliable. 
2. In addition, my Blog and Paper groups were not randomly selected or statistically equivalent.  My groups were selected by a “convenience” sampling, which also was an issue in the data analysis process. 

So, in analyzing the data for my research study, the data showed that writing improvement was inconclusive – for me, for my study – not in general.  If the study was replicated, making corrections to #1 and #2 above, I do feel that writing progress would be evident, especially if the study was executed over a longer duration (i.e., the entire school year).  Students went from writing 1-2 paragraphs, on average, to well developed, organized narratives.  To me, that’s growth…… and the students felt that they improved as well, as evidenced in the video that they created for the Board Presentation. 

The student-created video is now available.  I hope you will enjoy it! 

KMS-EMU Research Study Video

Also, feel free to read some of the student writing samples.  Many are quite good!  Select the link below and click on the web addresses:

Credits

Having earned a graduate degree in Educational Media & Technology, I do believe that technology integration is key to motivating students in this Technology Age.  And, as expressed more eloquently by Edutopia, it is important to realize: 

“Technology is ubiquitous, touching almost every part of out lives, our communities, our homes. Yet most schools lag far behind when it comes to integrating technology into classroom learning. Many are just beginning to explore the true potential tech offers for teaching and learning. Properly used, technology will help students acquire the skills they need to survive in a complex, highly technological knowledge-based economy”.

In sum, although my research study did not add to the studies where growth was statistically evident, it was a good opportunity for me to learn that 7th graders can responsibly publish on the Internet.  And, it is this researcher’s opinion that, for many, motivation and writing skills did improve.  I look forward to replicating this study and acquiring the statistical evidence to support my opinion. 

Sincerely,

Antoinette Gurney

« Study Proposal