The effect of word processing on students' grades and evaluation of instruction was studied by testing 235 students in 15 sections of freshman composition. Word-processing sections wrote and revised their papers on the Macintosh Plus, while traditionally taught sections used paper, pencil, and typewriter. At the end of the semester responses to a 15-item scale for evaluation of instructor and course indicated that students in the word-processing sections had more positively expressed attitudes than those in the traditionally taught sections. There was no significant difference between the two modes of instruction on course grades.
References
1.
ChaseC. I.KeeneJ. M. (1979) Validity of student ratings of faculty. (Tech. Rep. No. 40)Bloomington, IN: Indiana University, Indiana Studies of Higher Education.
2.
CoulterC. A. (1986) Writing with word processors: Effects on cognitive development, revision and writing quality. (Doctoral dissertation, The Univer. of Oklahoma, 1986)Dissertation Abstracts International, 47, 2551A.
3.
DaiuteC. (1986) Physical and cognitive factors in revising: Insights from studies with computers. Research in the Teaching of English, 20, 141–159.
4.
DickinsonD. K. (1986) Cooperation, collaboration, and a computer: Integrating a computer into a first-second grade writing program. Research in the Teaching of English, 20, 357–378.
5.
GiovanniniM.MillerF. M. (1983) A comparison of teaching business communications by the traditional writing and the word processing methods. Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, 24, 155–163.
6.
GiovanniniM.MillerF. M. (1984) Teaching business communications: A comparison of teaching by the traditional writing and the word processing methods. Journal of Studies in Technical Careers, 6, 21–28.
7.
GreenlandL. T.BartholomewL. W. (1987) The effect of the use of microcomputers on writing ability and attitude toward business communication classes. Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, 29, 78–90.
8.
HaasC.HayesJ. R. (1986) What did I just say? Reading problems in writing with the machine. Research in the Teaching of English, 20, 22–35.
9.
HarrisJ. (1985) Student writers and word processing: A preliminary evaluation. College Composition and Communication, 36, 323–330.
10.
HawisherG. E. (1987) The effects of word processing on the revision strategies of college freshmen. Research in the Teaching of English, 21, 145–159.
11.
HawisherG. E. (1988) Research in computers and writing: Findings and implications. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
12.
KaplanH. (1986) Computers and composition: Improving students' written performance. (Doctoral dissertation, Univer. of Massachusetts, 1986)Dissertation Abstracts International, 47, 776A.
13.
KirkR. E. (1982) Experimental design: Procedures for the behavioral sciences. (2nd ed.) Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.
14.
LansingM. L. (1984) Student writers and word processing: A case study. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 249 491).
15.
LutzJ. A. (1987) A study of professional and experienced writers revising and editing at the computer and with pen and paper. Research in the Teaching of English, 21, 398–421.
16.
SommersE. (1985) The effects of word processing and writing instruction on the writing processes and products of college writers. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 269 762).
17.
TeichmanM. (1985) What college freshmen say about word processing. Perspectives in Computing: Applications in the Academic and Scientific Community, 4, 43–48.
