A descriptive analysis of the writing performance and progress of a selected group of high-risk students in developmental English at a two-year state community college

The purpose of this study was threefold: (1) to analyze the writing performance and progress of a selected group of students enrolled in an individualized developmental English course, (2) to assess the students' attitudes about writing as active participants in the writing process, and (3) to determine whether raters, if properly trained, can be expected to reach a high degree of correlation in the assessment of writing quality and ability.

The impetus for this study grew primarily out of a desire to test a frequent and long-standing assumption about writing, that is, the more students write, the better their writing should become. Participants in this study were required to complete thirty-three paragraphs and thirty-nine other short writing exercises. The investigation was conducted at Chattanooga State Technical Community College, Chattanooga, Tennessee, during the Winter Quarter, 1982.

A pretest and post-test design was used in conducting the study, and an analytic method of rating compositions was applied to this design. Themes written at the beginning and end of the quarter were compared to determine what changes, if any, occurred in the participants' writing. A twenty-two item Writing Attitude Survey was also developed and administered at both the beginning and end of the quarter. Responses from the survey were compared to determine the extent and kinds of changes, if any, which occurred in the participants' attitudes about writing.

Findings revealed that there was no statistically significant changes, or improvements in the participants' writing skills after a quarter of instruction. In no case was the improvement greater than an increase from D⁺ to C^-. The majority of the participants received essentially the same rating on both the initial and final papers, although in general, more participants received slightly higher ratings on the final paper than received the lower rating. In addition, it was noted that there were no significant changes in the participants' attitudes about writing. No relationship was found between performance and progress and the sex, race, or age of the participants. There was statistical evidence which suggested that if raters are properly trained, they can be expected to attain a relatively high degree of correlation in the assessment of writing quality and ability.

Based upon the findings in this study it was concluded that it appears to be difficult to achieve a substantial level of improvement in the writing skills of high-risk students when restricted to a single quarter of instruction.