Effects of Cooperative and Individual Rewriting on an Instruction Writing Task

Abstract

The performance of students who rewrote an experimenter-provided set of instructions in dyads or individually was compared with that of individuals who wrote without access to those instructions. A total of 49 students participated in the experiment. The rewriting groups were provided with sample instructions and were asked to improve them; the writing group simply wrote instructions. All students then wrote a second set of instructions individually. The results showed that on the first task both the dyadic rewriting group and the individual writing group significantly outperformed the individual rewriting group on a communication score. Significant differences were also found on the completeness score. The ordering of means on this measure from highest to lowest was individual rewriters, dyadic rewriters, and the writing individuals.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bissland, J. H. (1980). Peer evaluation method promotes sharper writing. Journalism Education, 34, 17-19.

Brooks, L. W. , & Dansereau, D. F. (1983). Effects of structural schema training and text organization on expository prose processing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(6), 811-820.

Brooks, L. W. , Dansereau, D. F. , Spurlin, J. E. , & Holley, C. D. (1983). The effects of headings on text processing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(2), 292-302.

Bruffee, K. A. (1984). Collaborative learning and the “Conversation of Mankind.” College English, 46(7), 635-652.

Dansereau, D. F. (1978). The development of a learning strategy curriculum. In H. F. O'Neil, Jr. (Ed.), Learning strategies. New York: Academic Press.

Deignan, G. M. (1973). The Delta Reading Vocabulary Test. Lowry, CO: Lowry Air Force Base, Air Force Human Resource Laboratory.

Fredericksen, C. H. , & Dominic, J. F. (1982). Writing: The nature, development, and teaching of written communication (Vol. 2). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Gebhardt, R. (1980). Teamwork and feedback: Broadening the base of collaborative writing. College English, 42(1), 69-74.

George, D. (1984). Working with peer groups in the composition classroom. College Composition in Communication, 35(3), 320-326.

10.

Hume, A. (1983). Research on the composing process. Review of Educational Research, 53(2), 201-216.

11.

Jacko, C. M. (1978). Small group triad: An instructional mode for the teaching of writing. College Composition and Communication, 29(3), 290-292.

12.

Kroll, B. M. (1985). Rewriting a complex story for a young reader: The development of audience adapted writing skills. Research in the Teaching of English, 19(2), 120-138.

13.

Lamberg, W. (1980). Self-provided and peer-provided feedback. College Composition and Communication, 31(1), 63-69.

14.

Mosenthal, P. , Tamor, L. , & Wolmsley, S. A. (1983). Research on writing: Principles and methods. New York: Longman.

15.

Newkirk, T. (1984). Direction and misdirection in peer response. College Composition and Communication, 35(3), 301-311.

16.

O'Donnell, A. M. , Dansereau, D. F. , Rocklin, T. R. , Lambiotte, J. G. , Hythecker, V. I. , & Larson, C. O. (1985). Cooperative writing: Direct effects and transfer. Written Communication, 2(3), 307-315.

17.

Oltman, P. E. , Raskin, E. , & Witkin, H. A. (1971). Group Embedded Figures Test. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

18.

Podis, L. A. (1980). Training peer tutors for the writing lab. College Composition and Communication, 31(1), 70-75.

19.

Pomerenke, P. J. (1984). Rewriting and peer evaluation: A positive approach for business writing classes. ABCA Bulletin, pp. 33-36.

20.

Scardamalia, M. , & Bereiter, C. (1985). Written composition. In M. Wittrock (Ed.), The handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed.). New York: Macmillan.

21.

Simon, H. A. (1980). Problem solving and education. In D. T. Tuma & F. Reif (Eds.), Problem solving and education: Issues in teaching and learning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.