© Copyright by ANTONIO ALFONSO FERNANDEZ 1978 A COMPARISON OF A MASSED AND A SPACED FILM PRESENTATION AS STIMULI FOR CREATIVE WRITING OF FOURTH AND FIFTH GRADERS BY Antonio Alfonso Fernandez A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Elementary and Special Education 1978 PLEASE NOTE: This dissertation contains some pages of illustrations with dark backgrounds which will not reproduce well. Filmed as received. UNIVERSITY MICROFILMS INTERNATIONAL ABSTRACT A COMPARISON OF A MASSED AND A SPACED FILM PRESENTATION AS STIMULI FOR CREATIVE WRITING OF FOURTH AND FIFTH GRADERS BY Antonio Alfonso Fernandez Research on the use of films in education has diminished since its Golden Age, the years during and immediately following World War II. The decline has been occurring, unfortunately, during the decades when motion pictures and television have become increasingly influen- tial in the society. For this study an animated, silent motion picture was designed to be used in two methods of presentation as stimulation for the original writing of fourth and fifth grade children. The film was open-ended; the story built to a climax and then stopped. In film version A, the Spaced presentation, four stopping points of eight seconds each were used to interrupt the viewing and engage the students in a questioning-listening—thinking activity based upon the film's developing story. In version B, the Massed presentation, no stops were included; the same questioning-listening-thinking activity occurred after the film viewing. It was hypothesized that if student-teacher Antonio Alfonso Fernandez interaction occurred within the viewing, the resulting stimulus for creative writing would be greater than if the same interaction occurred after the viewing. The population for the study included four class- rooms of fourth graders and four classrooms of fifth graders, a total of 171 children, in a suburban metropoli- tan school district. Classrooms were randomly assigned to the two treatment modes. The experimenter introduced the film, presented the questions at the designated points, and asked the children to write interesting endings for the unfinished film. The writings of both student groups were mixed together and presented as one set of papers to two trained raters for evaluation using a holistic-general impression marking instrument. Correlation of rater response was .80. Rater evaluations for the two modes of presentation were rank-ordered from 1 to 171 and analyzed by the Mann-Whitney test for two independent samples. Significant difference was found between the Massed and the Spaced presentations (3.01) in favor of the Massed viewing; that is, children who were asked all questions after viewing the film wrote papers that received higher average scores than children who were asked the same ques- tions at intervals within the viewing sequence. This result is contrary to the main hypothesis proposed in the design of the study. The following research questions were also examined: (1) correlations between the student writings Antonio Alfonso Fernandez and the students' reading scores on the Michigan Educational Assessment Program; (2) differences in the quality of writing of boys and girls. A correlation was found between the students' writing and their reading ability as measured by the Michigan Educational Assessment Program reading examination (5.001). Differences by sex were significant within the Spaced presentation, in favor of girls (5.05). No differences in the writings by sex were found in the following: between total groups for versions A and B; within the Massed presentation; in the top quartiles of both the Massed and Spaced presentations; and in the bottom quartiles of both the Massed and Spaced presentations. The results of this study indicate that film can be used effectively in writing lessons when combined with student-teacher interaction. Further research is needed to determine the most effective modes of presentation for} instructional films. A.modification of the design of this study, incorporating open discussion rather than closed questioning, would be feasible if a large number of class- rooms were available. Dedicated to the Beagle-- whose integrity, sense of humor, and sparkling personality give perspective and balance when needed. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Professional guidance, moral support, subtle prodding, and encouragement were freely and graciously given to this student by his advisor, dissertation director, and doctoral committee chairperson, Sheila M. Fitzgerald. Words cannot express . . . . . . . . My appreciation is extended to Bruce Miles, cognate advisor. His criticisms--always constructive--helped to bring the study in focus; I am grateful to William Joyce, the third member of the doctoral committee, for his insightful observations and practical suggestions; and I would like to thank Don Wilkening, the fourth member of the committee, for his interest and c00peration throughout my four years at Michigan State University. Assistance on statistical matters, offered by Patricia Busk and Joe Byers of the College of Education, is appreciated. And special thanks to Steve Gitterman of the Office of Research Consultation for his relentless quest of the perfect experimental design. I am beholden to Jan Mitzner and Connie Meyerle, invaluable evaluators of the children's writing. My Canadian friends in Winnipeg were most obliging. Barbara Angel of the National Film Board provided a iii refreshing outlook on film in education, and Earl Enns and Denis Hlynka made perceptive observations on the experi- mental design during two enlightening summers at the University of Manitoba. John Phelps' persistent questionings, although anxiety-provoking, further clarified the issues of the study. His queries are acknowledged and I'm glad they're over. Linda Gebhard, typist, was neat, precise, and correct; her alacrity is commendable. Brief (but indispensable) assistance was selflessly offered by Rafael Fernandez; he is an exemplary auxiliary animator. Te lo agradezco, amigo. Thanks are extended to my niece, Stephanie Fernandez, for lending me the gorilla. Lastly, I am indebted to Joe Kuszai and his Design Center, a prism that helped me see. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . LIST OF FIGURES. . . . . . . . Chapter I. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM . . Purpose . . . . . . . Hypotheses . . . . . . The Main Hypothesis. . . Differences in Writing by Sex Correlations between Reading and Writing . . . . . . Experimental Procedures . Limitations of the Study. Significance of the Study Definitions . . . Organization of the Study II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . . Overview: Language, Language Thinking . . . . . . Media in the Language Arts Film in Education . . . . A Search for a Comparable Motion Picture . . . . . . Film Studies: A Historical Perspective. . . Film Research Related to This Study Methodology for Interaction: Teacher- Film-Students . . . . Page ix xi (”UT 00‘ 10 10 ll 13 18 18 21 22 25 27 31 36 Chapter Student Writing. . . . . . . Historical Perspective. . . . Stimulating Writing: Audiovisuals Other Devices . . . . . . Stimulating Writing: Questioning Strategies . . . . . . . Evaluation of Writing . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . III. DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY . . . . . IV. Purposes of the Study. . Hypotheses . . . . . The Experimental Design . Design Validity. . . . The Statistical Measure Background to the Study Filming Techniques . . . . . The Plot . . . . . . . . Scene 1 . . . . . . . . Scene 2 . . . . . . . . Scene 3 . . . . . . . . Scene 4 . . . . . . . . Scene 5 . . . . . . . . Questioning Strategies. . Background to the Pilot Study . The Pilot Study . . . . . . The Population Studied . . . . The Experimental Groups' . . . Page . . . 41 . . . 41 and . . . 45 . . . 50 . . . 56 . . . 64 . . . 79 . . 79 . . 80 . . . 84 . . . 86 . . . 86 . . . 87 O O O 88 . 89 . . . 89 . . . 89 . . . 90 . . . 90 . . . 91 . . . 92 . . . 95 . . . 99 Student Writing Evaluation Procedure. . . 109 Summary . . . . . . . . . ANALYSIS OF EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS. . The Main Hypothesis . . . . . Differences in Writing by Sex . . Correlations between Reading and Writing. . . . . . . . . Analysis of the Main Hypothesis . vi 0 O O 116 Chapter Analysis of Differences by Sex. Analysis of Correlations between and Writing . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS. . . . Summary . . . . . . . . Characteristics of the Film in Study. 0 O ’ O O O O O Student-Teacher Interaction Interesting Presentation . Meaningful Content . . . Stimulating Design . . . Purpose. . . . . . . . Review of the Literature . . Design and Methodology. . . Analysis of Data. . . . . Conclusions . . . . . . Differences in Methods of Presentation . . . . . Differences in Writing by Sex Reading this Correlations between Reading and Writing . . . . . . . Discussion . . . . . . . Implications of the Study . . Suggestions for Further Research A Final Word. . . . . . . APPENDICES Appendix A. Results of the D011 Study . . . B. Syn0psis. . . . . . . . . C. Instructions to Students and Questioning Strategies . . . . . . . D. Teacher and Principal Questionnaire. . . E. Sample of Writing Paper. . . . vii Page 127 136 139 143 143 144 144 145 145 145 146 147 148 149 151 151 152 154 155 160 161 162 165 166 178 183 186 Appendix Page F. Student Writing Samples: (1) High Quality, (2) Middle Quality, (3) Low Quality. . . 187 G. Representation of Student Paper Rankings. . 190 H. Tabulation of Experimental Data Analyses. . l9l BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195 viii LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1.1 Gallup Poll Parent Estimate of Children's Television Viewing. . . . . . . . . 2 2.1 Analytic Scale. . . . . . . . . . . 61 2.2 Dichotomous Scale. . . . . . . . . . 62 3.1 The Experimental Design. . . . . . . . 85 3.2 Scoring Distribution of Pilot Papers . . . 100 3.3 School District Population. . . . . . . . 103 3.4 Experimental School Population . . . . . 103 3.5 Teacher Questionnaire Results. . . . . . 107 3.6 Experimental Subjects Lost. . . . . . . 108 3.7 Experimental Subjects: Treatment, Grade - Level, and Sex . . . . . . . . . . 110 3.8 Scoring Distribution of Experimental Pamrs. O O O O O O O O O O I O 111 4.1 Difference in Holistic Scores: Massed Presentation versus Spaced Presentation. . 126 4.2 Difference in Holistic Scores: Males versus Females . . . . . . . . . . 128 4.3 Difference in the Holistic Scores of the Massed Presentation: Males versus Females O O O O O O O O O O O O 129 4.4 Difference in the Holistic Scores of the Spaced Presentation: Males versus Females O O O O O C O O O O O O 131 ix Table 4.5 4.6 4.11 Difference in the Top Quartile Holistic Scores of the Massed Presentation: Males versus Females. . . . . . . . . . Difference in the TOp Quartile Holistic Scores of the Spaced Presentation: Males versus Females. . . . . . . . . . Difference in the Bottom Quartile Holistic Scores of the Massed Presentation: Males versus Females. . . . . . . . . . Difference in the Bottom Quartile Holistic Scores of the Spaced Presentation: Males versus Females. . . . . . . . . . Correlation between M.E.A.P. Reading Scores and Holistic Scores . . . . . . . . Correlation between M.E.A.P. Reading Scores of Students in the Spaced Presentation and Their Holistic Scores . . . . . . Correlation between M.E.A.P. Reading Scores of Students in the Massed Presentation and Their Holistic Scores . . . . . . Condensed Representation of Student Paper Rankings (Rater l and Rater 2) . . . . Tabulation of Experimental Data Analysis: Main Hypothesis . . . . . . . . . Tabulation of Experimental Data Analysis: Related Research Questions. . . . . . Tabulation of Experimental Data Analysis: Correlation Between Reading and writing 0 O O O O O O I O O O O Page 132 133 135 136 137 138 139 190 191 192 194 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 3.1 Graphic Illustration of Two Film Versions (A and B). o o o o o o o o o o o 93 3.2 Ranking by Rater l of Papers in Packet 3 . . 114 3.3 Ranking by Researcher of A11 Papers from Rater 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 xi “.___.-———5 CHAPTER I STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM The Golden Age of educational film research included the years during and immediately following World War II (Allenl'). Today, however, researchers are interested in other areas of educational technology, such as instructional television, programmed instruction, and computer assisted instruction (Hoban2 ). This is unfortu- nate because the educational potential in film has not diminished; in fact, the potential, as will be shown below, is greater today than in the past. :3 claims that television is an electronic 4 Snider extension of film. Chu and Schramm corroborate Snider's position by drawing conclusions on the effectiveness of instructional television from previous studies on educa- 5 6 tional film (e.g., Michael and Maccoby, 7) Ash and Jaspen, McGrane and Baron . If television stimuli is considered equivalent to film stimuli, then the following findings are pertinent to the present study. Culkin8 discovered that by age 16 the average student has been exposed to 11,000 hours of schooling and 15,000 hours of television. In addition, the 1977 Gallup Poll of the Public's Attitudes Toward Schoolsg showed parents' estimate of television viewing during a typical school day to be considerable (refer to Table 1.1 below). Table l.l.--Gallup Poll Parent Estimate of Children’s Television Viewing. Age Twelve-year-olds Thirteen-year-olds and below and above Television 2 hours 2 hours Homework 45 minutes 1 hour Reading 30 minutes 30 minutes Johnson,10 in addition, declares that students see twenty motion pictures for every single book they read. Children today, therefore, are exposed to a considerable amount of film stimuli, through the television medium and motion pictures. This exposure educates the child to interpret film messages at an early age. Phillips affirms that Children today are already adept at interpreting visual messages presented in a_sequence of pic- tures. Through the use of films, we can increase their ability to receive and evaluate visual messages and help them transfer these skills to verbal modes of communication.11 And Smith describes the potential of film stimuli to education by stating the following: It has been said that the whole curriculum could simply be youngster's responses to the television programs and movies they see or could see every day.12 Finally, the use of film in the teaching of English is considered important by the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education: . . . film seems to be the most rewarding, the most popular, and consequently the most frequently used medium of those mass media currently beinfé 1ntegrated 1nto the teach1ng of Engl1sh. . . . One specific use of film in the English curriculum is as a stimulus for creative writing. Studies on film that incorporate writing have been conducted by several researchers. Huntington,l4 for example, used a film with- out words as a stimulus for creative writing with three different post stimulus variables: delay in writing after viewing, reviewing the film content after viewing, and seeing the film a second time. He measured the syntactic complexity of sixth grade students' writings after the three stimuli were presented and found no difference among the three varibles. Ueharals investigated the effects of three different stimuli on third and fifth grade writing: a set of pictures, a recording of environmental sounds, and a film.without words. No difference was found among the three presentations. And, Ewingl6 compared the effects of four stimuli on children's writing: (1) the children were asked to write a short story: (2) the children listened to a musical selection; (3) the children viewed a silent film; and, (4) children drew a picture before writing. The highest quality writing was produced by the children who received minimal stimuli (that is, children who were simply asked to write a story). A more specific use of film as a stimulus for creative writing includes student participation during the film viewing. There is no indication, however, that this particular design has been created. The review of the experiments that follow depict studies that include student participation with film for purposes of factual learning, not as stimuli for creative writing. Hovland, Lumsdaine, 17 and Sheffield found that participation by the audience while viewing a film increases learning. And Travers18 determined that student participation during the viewing was effective to learning factual information; the partici- pation would be equally effectivercovertly as overtly. Finally, it is possible to have the teacher as well as the students participate during the viewing. Again, there are no experimental designs as yet that use a film as stimulus for creative writing by incorporating student- teacher interaction. Snider}9 however, reviewed the ‘writings of research on instructional film and found that researchers infer that the most effective methods for using film in the classroom result from its use by a teacher wan) follows the principles of good instruction. This study combines film, student participation, teacher participation, and creative writing. The student and teacher participation occurs through the interaction of the teacher with students through questioning strate- gies. The study focuses on film and on three of the five basic skills of the language arts: listening, viewing, and writing. The philosophy that underscores the study is summarized by James Moffett: Wholeness is the key. The great principle of nature is unity--the harmony of many things in oneness, of parts within wholes. . . . In our own age of increasing fragmentation it takes a special effort to offset disintegration and compartmentali— zation. So it is critical to integrate language schooling in every possible way--the learner, the learning, and what is to be learned.20 Purpose The purpose of this study is to compare two methods of using a motion picture that has been designed to stimulate creative writing of fourth and fifth grade students. The study compares two questioning strategies using two versions of the same silent motion picture. In film version A (the Spaced presentation), a questioning strategy occurs within short interruptions during the viewing of the film; in film versiOn B (the Massed presen- tation), the questioning strategy occurs after the viewing. The film is open-ended; the story builds to a climax and then stops (i.e., there is no conclusion). Experimental subjects furnish an ending to the story by writing. The writing is evaluated by means of a holistic- general impression marking instrument and the writing scores are used as the measure of effectiveness of each questioning strategy. Hypotheses The experiment investigates (A) the main hypothesis; (B) differences in writing quality by sex; and, (C) corre- lations between quality of writing and scores on the Michigan Educational Assessment Program Reading Examination. The Main Hypothesis Stated in null form, the main hypothesis appears H : There is no difference between mean scores on o the holistic measure of writing following the Spaced presentation and the mean scores on the holistic measure of writing following the Massed presentation. H1: There is a difference between mean scores on the holistic measure of writing following the Spaced presentation and the mean scores on the holistic measure of writing following the Massed presentation. The hypothesis can be expressed symbolically as Ho: E(X) = E(Y) H E(X) 7‘ BF“ 1: Differences in Writing by Sex 1. Is there a difference in the holistic scores of males versus females? Stated in null hypothesis form: H : There is no difference between the holistic scores of male subjects and female subjects H1: There is a difference between the holistic scores of male subjects and female subjects Is there a difference in the holistic scores of the Massed presentation: males versus females? Stated in null hypothesis form: Ho: I-‘ .0 There is no difference between the holistic scores of male subjects and female subjects in the Massed presentation There is a difference between the holistic scores of male subjects and female subjects in the Massed presentation Is there a difference in the holistic scores of the Spaced presentation: males versus females? Stated in null hypothesis form: Ho: Is there a difference in the top quartile holistic There is no difference between the holistic scores of male subjects and female subjects in the Spaced presentation There is a difference between the holistic scores of male subjects and female subjects in the Spaced presentation scores between males and females in the Massed presentation? Stated in null hypothesis form: H : o Is there a difference in the top quartile holistic There is no difference between the top quartile holistic scores of male subjects and female subjects in the Massed presentation There is a difference between the top quartile holistic scores of male subjects and female subjects in the Massed presentation scores between males and females in the Spaced presentation? M...» u—m M”.J_—-‘- Stated in null hypothesis form: H : There is no difference between the top quartile holistic scores of male subjects and female subjects in the Spaced presentation H1: There is a difference between the top quartile holistic scores of male subjects and female subjects in the Spaced presentation Is there a difference in the bottom quartile holistic scores between males and females in the Massed presentation? Stated in null hypothesis form: H : There is no difference between the bottom 0 quartile holistic scores of male subjects and female subjects in the Massed presentation There is a difference between the bottom quartile holistic scores of male subjects and female subjects in the Massed presentation Is there a difference in the bottom quartile holistic scores between males and females in the Spaced presentation? Stated in null hypothesis form: Ho: There is no difference between the bottom quartile holistic scores of male subjects and female subjects in the Spaced presentation H1: There is a difference between the bottom quartile holistic scores of male subjects and female subjects in the Spaced presentation Correlations between Reading and Writing 1. Is there a correlation between the Michigan Educational Assessment Program reading scores and the holistic scores? Is there a correlation between the Michigan Educational Assessment Program reading scores and the holistic scores of students in the Spaced presentation? 3. Is there a correlation between the Michigan Educational Assessment Program reading scores and the holistic scores of students in the Massed presentation? Experimental Procedures The researcher will involve students in a listening, viewing, and writing activity by means of different presen- tations of the same silent motion picture. Both film versions, A and B, are open-ended; the story builds to a climax and then stops. Film version A, the Spaced presen- tation, has four stopping points. At each point the researcher stops the projector and engages the experimental subjects in a questioning strategy. After the last question is asked, the students are requested to furnish an ending to the story by writing. Film version B, the Massed presentation, does not have stopping points. The film is shown en toto; after the viewing the children are asked the same questions that were asked during the deve10pment of the Spaced presentation, film version A. After the questioning, the students that participated in film version B are requested to furnish an ending to the story by writing. The children's writing from both the Massed and Spaced viewing groups will be evaluated by two professional raters using a holistic-general impression marking instru- ment. The scores of the writings will be analyzed statistically to determine if there is a difference between the two sets of papers. It is hypothesized that 10 stopping the film and conducting the questioning strategy as the story develops will be a more effective stimulus to creative writing than conducting the questioning strategy after the viewing. The measure of which stimulus is superior will be the quality of the student writing. Limitations of the Study The film used in this experimental study was designed and created specifically for the study. Generali- zations of the results can only be made to this particular film. Equality of the two experimental groups was deter- mined by random assignment of classrooms. Extraneous factors that may have affected the outcomes were considered and, when possible, controlled: Controlled: room illumination, the researcher's verbal presentation to students, the hour of day for conducting the experi- ment, the seating arrangements for viewing the film, and the commonality of writing instruments. Considered: classroom teacher's experience (i.e., number of years teaching). classroom structure (highly structured versus open), amount of writing performed by the students per week, amount of film viewing per week, comments made by students during the film viewing and comments made by students during the writing activity. Significance of the Study Conclusions from the experiment, combined with pertinent information gleaned from other research, will 11 lead educators to consider film: (1) as a useful tool in instruction; (2) as an effective instrument to teach the language arts; and, (3) in one specific design, as an effective stimulus for children's writing. The practical results from the experiment will show pre-service and in-service teachers how they may effectively use film as a stimulus for creative writing. The design of the study may generate other investi- gations on the effectiveness of film in the classroom, and it may offer useful guidelines to producers of commercial films. Lastly, the study will demonstrate that in today's society classroom instruction by the teacher shares a symbiotic relationship with film. This conclusion will influence the practical daily activities of teachers as well as the conceptual and theoretical endeavors of educational researchers. Definitions The chapters that follow contain words from the area of media and the language arts. Some words arise from technological concerns, while others have meaning specific to this study. In order to clarify the meaning of some of these words the following definitions are given: jflriting; creative writing: in this study all aspects of writing will be considered ”creative” (i.e., original). Writing is defined as the process of transferring original thoughts/language to print. 12 Holistic evaluation: a method of evaluating writing that uses the rater‘s general impression of the whole piece, rather than specific features such as spelling, punctua- tion, penmanship, etc. Language arts: the term that encompasses the traditional features of Language known as Reading, Writing, Speaking, and Listening, as well as Viewing, all interrelated with Thinking. Viewing: a new component of the language arts. Viewing encompasses the effective use of vision in the process of communication. Audiovisual materials: a collective noun (not the name of a field), referring to a collection of materials and devices which are displayed by visual projection and/or sound reproduction.* Educational technology: a complex, integrated process involving people, procedures, ideas, devices and organiza- tion, for analyzing problems, and devising, implementing, evaluating and managing solutions to those problems, involved in all aspects of human learning.* Educational media: the media born of the communications revolution which’can be used for instructional purposes alongside the teacher, textbook, and b1ackboard.* Media: all of the forms and channels used in the transmittal of information process.* Motion_picture: a length of film, with or without magnetic or optical sound track, bearing a sequence of images which create the illusion of movement when projected in rapid succession.* Film: a term synonymous with motion picture.* Educational/Instructional film: motion pictures used by educators, with specific objectives in mind, to enhance learning. Massed viewing presentation: the showing of a motion picture, ffom.beginning to end, without interruption. Spaced viewin 4presentation: the showing of a motion pieture with p anned interruptions at designated locations. —; *Definitions taken from Educational Technolo Definition and Glossary of Terms, Vol. 1 (WaEhington, D.C.: FEET, 1977) . 13 Animation: a filming technique in which a single exposure is taken at a time with the motion picture camera. The results of this filming technique can give the illusion of movement to inanimate objects. Continuity: the impression that the flow of the action that appears on the screen is proceeding smoothly with respect to both time and space. Fade-in: when the projected image on the screen shows total darEness, and then slowly builds in light intensity to reveal the first visuals. Fade-out: when the projected film slowly darkens until the screen is black. Frame: a single exposure of motion picture film. Shot: a single run of the camera; also, the basic division of film. Cut: the joining of two segments of film (i.e., the joining of two shots); when one shot ends and the next one begins. Close-up: a shot taken with the camera close to the subject so that only the subject is shown (usually the face). Organization of the Study Chapter I (this chapter) contains the following: a statement of the problem, the purpose of the study, the hypothesis to be tested and related research questions, the experimental procedures, the limitations of the study, the study's significance, and definition of terms. Chapter II contains the review of literature pertinent to the study. The following areas are con- sidered: overview of language, the language arts, and thinking, including a section on media in the language arts; film in education, including an historical perspec- tive, current research, and a methodology for the film experiment; and, student writing, including an historical l4 perspective, methods of stimulation, and methods of evaluation. Chapter III is the design of the experimental study and includes the following: background to the study, the purposes of the study, the hypothesis to be tested and related research questions, the experimental design and statistical measure, a description of the population to be studied, a description of the student writing evaluation methods, and the procedures used in conducting the experi- ment. Chapter IV contains an analysis of the data obtained from the experiment. Chapter V concludes the study. Included are the summary, the conclusions, a discussion, suggestions for future research, implications of the study, and a final word. CHAPTE R I NOTES 1W. H. Allen, "Instructional Media Research: Past Present, and Future," A—V Communications Review 19 (1971): 5-18, in C. F. Hoban, The State of the Art of Instructional Films (Stanford: ERIC Clearinghouse on Media and Tech- noIogy, September 1971), p. 20. 2C. F. Hoban, The State of the Art of Instructional Films (Stanford: ERIC Clearinghouse on Media and’Tech- noIog , September 1971), p. 20. 3Robert C. Snider, "Selection and Use of Visual Media," Visual Communication (Washington, D.C.: AECT, 1960), p. 126. 4Godwin C. Chu and Wilbur Schramm, Learning from Television (Washington, D.C.: The National Society of’ ProfeSSIonals in Telecommunications, n.d.). 5D. N. Michael and N. Maccoby, "Factors Influencing Verbal Learning from Films Under Varying Conditions of Audience Participation," Journal of Experimental Psychology 46 (1953):4ll-18; in Chu and Schramm, Learning'from Television, p. 53. 6P. Ash and N. Jaspen, "Optimum Physical Viewing Conditions for a Rearproject Daylight Screen," Technical Report SDC 269-7-37, Instructional Film Research Reports (New York: U.S. Naval Special Devices Center, 1953); in Chu and Schramm, Learning from Television, p. 38. 7J. F. McGrane and M. L. Baron, "A Comparison of Learning Resulting from.Motion Picture Projector and Closed Circuit Television Presentations," Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers Journal 68 (l959):824-27; in Chu and Schramm, LearningffromTelevision, p. 40. 15 16 8John Culkin, "Doing the Truth," in Doing the Media, ed. Kit Laybourne (New York: Center for Under- standing Media, 1972), pp. 5-8; from a paper presented by Dr. Bruce D. Johnson, Educational Consultant, Films, Inc., AECT National Convention, Kansas City, March 1978, "Classroom Media: Critical Viewing/Critical Thinking." 9"The 1977 Gallup Poll of the Public's Attitude Toward the Public Schoolsfl Phi Delta Kappan 59 (September 1977):45. 10Ted Johnson, "Using Film in the Classroom," paper presented at the NCTE National Convention, Las Vegas, November 1971 (ERIC Document 085 759), p. 8. 11Jean Phillips, Learning Through Pyramid Films: A Guide for the Teacher (Santa Monica: Pyramid Film Corpora- tion, 1978) I p0 11. 12E. Brooks Smith, Kenneth S. Goodman, and Robert Meredith,Language and Thinking in School, 2nd ed. (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1976), P. 336. 13The Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, Use of Film in the Teaching of English (Toronto, 1971), p. v. l4Jefferson R. Huntington, "Effects of Instructional Variables on Syntactic Complexity and Clarity in Children's Written Composition" (Ph.D. dissertation, Rutgers Univer- sity, New Brunswick, New Jersey, 1968); in Interpreting Language Arts Resggrch for the Teacher, Harold G. Shane, James Walden, and Ronald Green (Washington, D.C.: NEA Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1971), p. 94. 15Betty K. Uehara, "The Effects of Three Different Stimuli on Third and Fifth Grade Written Composition" (Ph.D. dissertation, The University of Arizona, 1974); in Dissertation Abstracts International 35 (Ann Arbor: Xerox Univ. Microfilms, December 1974):3582-A. 16June B. Ewing, "A Study of the Influence of Various Stimuli on the Written Composition of Selected Third Grade Children" (Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University, 1967); in Dissertation Abstrgcts International 28 (Ann Arbor: Univ. Microfilms):4525 (ED 033120). 17 17C. I. Hovland, A. A. Lumsdaine, and F. D. Sheffield, Experiments in Mass Communication (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1949). 18Robert M. W. Travers, Research and Theory Related to Audiovisual Information Transmission (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education, Contract #3-20-003, 1967). 19Snider, "Selection and Use of Visual Media, p. 127. 20James Moffett and Betty Jane Wagner, Student- Centered Language Arts and Reading, K-13, 2nd ed. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1976), p. 42. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE The basic purpose of this experimental study is to determine if a Spaced viewing presentation of a motion picture is a greater stimulus to creative writing than a Massed viewing presentation of the same motion picture. The basic experimental design has several interrelated components: 1. The use of film in the language arts classroom 2. Film as stimulus to creative writing 3. Student-teacher interaction as stimulus to creative writing 4. Evaluation of writing 5. Instructional effectiveness of a motion picture designed to be stopped for student participation These components comprise the major areas of research in the study and are included in the following review of literature. Overview: Langua e, Language Arts, and T inking Language is at the center of the curricular area known as the language arts, an area composed of the skills listening, speaking, reading, and writing. This focus on 18 19 language, according to Petty, Petty, and Becking,1 empha- sizes the middle ground between (1) the more narrow elements associated with traditional English instruction, such as writing, grammar, and literature; and, (2) the broad aspects of communication, such as sound, sight, feel, and smell. The central position of language in the school experience is emphasized by E. Brooks Smith: The child is surely at the center of the learning process, for he will only learn what he can incor- porate into his knowing. The teacher is certainly at the center of what will be taught, for he alone can prepare the environment and set the stage for instruction. But language is central to the interaction of teaching and learning that produces knowing.2 We see from the above comments by Petty and Smith that language (1) facilitates the interaction between teaching and learning; and (2) interlinks the skills of listening, speaking, reading, and writing. The interrelationship among the four skills redefines language as a new subject or, more precisely, as a non-subject: Language learning is different from other school subjects. It is not a new subject, and it is not even a subject. It permeates every part of people's lives. . . . Since people learn language outside of school and before they enter school, you should think of it as a continuity that you will try to help youngsters develop while they are passing through your hands. (Moffett13) The continuity to which Moffett refers is maintained in the classroom through meaningful experiences: All experience producing and receiving language teaches and refines control of grammar . . . and the best approach to experience language is to interweave the language arts in a conscious, well-thought out design.4 20 Lundsteen agrees with Moffett's experiential approach to learning: Ideally, teachers help develop language in the school by an inter-related program designed to encourage various uses. The emphasis is on think- ing skills, because the curriculum for language learning is a program in thinking. . . .5 Lundsteen's emphasis on thinking adds an important element to language learning and the language arts: thinking. According to Vygotsky speech and thought are unrelated in the beginning stages of child development, but soon they begin to merge: Up to a certain point in time, the two follow different lines independently of each other. At a certain point these lines meet, whereupon thought becomes verbal and speech rational.6 As language develops, therefore, it becomes a convenient symbolic medium for thought (Smith7), and thinking becomes the underlying principle to all language learning. This overview will close with one final observation on the language arts. The 1966 Dartmouth Seminar on the teaching of English recognized the importance of the pro- 1iferation of audiovisual stimuli through the mass media in today's society. The Seminar acknowledged the impor- tance of this impact by concluding that literature today includes . . . the television presentation as well as the printed book, and that both are the responsibility of the English department. This has complex and far-reaching implications. The making of a tape or film, the holding of an inter-school conference, may become as natural forms of presentation as the making of a magazine.8 21 The importance of visual communication, therefore, adds a fifth skill to the traditional four language arts skills: viewing. Media in the Language Arts The increasing importance of media to education is emphasized by W. Willard Wirtz, chairman of an independent panel studying the decline in S.A.T. scores, who comments on behalf of the panel that . . . TV and other mass media probably have the largest teaching potential that we know about today. . . .9 And Jean Phillips comments that As educators discover more about how children learn, they are beginning to realize that visual, verbal, and cognitive skills are interconnected . . . films and audiovisual materials can be used effectively as an integral part of the curriculum.10 If language is best learned experientially 11 12 (Moffett, Lundsteen ), and if language is a blend of such strongly interrelated skills as listening, speaking, . . . . . . 1 read1ng, writing, and View1ng (Petty, Petty, and Beck1ng; 14 and Moffett ), then the multifaceted qualities of film make this medium of expression a natural ally of the language arts. Smith comments on the harmony between film and language as follows: The dramatic forms of theater, movies, and tele- vision can at their best integrate the several symbolic forms (including language) and create a cognitive and emotional impact impossible in the separate forms.15 22 Sheridan explains that film has . . . a special quality which no one has yet satis- factorily named. It is something like immediacy or instantaneousness, an astonishing total impact on the senses.16 Sheridan compares film to literature in that they both share the qualities form, structure, theme, irony, meta- phor, and symbol .17 Film, like opera, can transcend several modes of artistic expression: music, song, theater, and dance. McAnany and Williams compare film to music: Time is somehow of the essence of both film and music. There are many aspects of time in a film: the timing of the various movements of subject and camera, the duration of shots to create a rhythm within a scene or sequence, and the time within the story itself that the filmmaker creates.18 And Frye13¢offers that film and literature are art forms in which the poet, the novelist, and the filmmaker express themselves through the use of the pen or camera. The qualities inherent in film, therefore, are complementary to the dynamics of the language arts class— room. This sets the stage for the general problem: how to best adapt film to language learning. Film in Education Audiovisual materials have been used in education for many years, primarily as adjuncts to verbal presenta- tions, textbooks, chalkboards, library materials, and other traditional means of instruction (Kempzo). The 16mm film was developed in the 19208 and 19308; its values in education have been questioned by some authors (Miller, 23 Levine, and Sternberger;21 Hooperzz), and praised by 24 25) Goodwin's support of film includes the following: (1) films others (Vandermeer,23 Goodwin, and Phillips can influence the students in ways that help them retain information more effectively than when the same material is presented verbally; (2) films can promote critical thinking and problem solving; (3) films can stimulate children to explore and research a given subject; and, (4) films help students think creatively and with a pur- pose, they stimulate the imagination, and they offer vicarious experiences that are most useful in an educa- tional setting.26 Phillips believes that Films inform, involve, and demand response from students. A good film brings forth from the viewer a reaction or response that involves the viewer visually and imaginatively.27 On the other hand, May and Lumsdaine28 explain that more precise information is needed on the effectiveness of film (e.g., the characteristics of superior films, effec- tive teaching methods, knowledge of the viewer's cognitive capabilities, and the teacher variable). Travers29 suggests that the problem of film effectiveness in educa- tion lies in a lack of a theoretical base. He believes, however, that a possible solution is developing: Within the last decade research in psychology has taken a turn which may end the impasse and which may lead to a close working association between those concerned with the design of audiovisual aids and those engaged in psychological research.30 24 According to Travers, therefore, individuals designing motion pictures in the future would be concerned with per- ception, attention, concept learning, the develOpment of meaning, forgetting and remembering, and verbalism. Salomon and Clark agree with Travers. They believe that the intrinsic nature of the medium can be understood; to realize this understanding, they suggest that the . . . attributes of media and technology be concep- tualized in terms of their psychological or instructional effects and functions, rather than in terms of their physical appearance.31 Providing a psychological-theoretical base to educational film gives it a definition as well. Lumsdaine and May, for example, state that the only criteria for an effective motion picture is its ultimate influence on the learner as measured by objective examination: . . . the success of a teaching film, unlike that of a film designed primarily for entertainment, cannot be assessed merely in terms of its popularity or even in terms of judgments about its artistic merits. Rather, the statement that an educational film is successful in accomplishing something makes the implicit assumption that pupils who have seen a film are expected to differ from what they were before they saw the film.32 Therefore, an objective measure of change is required to verify the film's effectiveness: The measure . . . is the gain (or loss) in the per- centage of pupils of a defined sample who correctly answered each item on a test.33 ' This approach to the understanding of instructional film concerns, primarily, the cognitive domain: the use of film to teach factual information. 25 This study concerns the use of film as a stimulus to creative writing; a motion picture is considered as a whole, and its specific attributes are not analyzed by an objective test. The study dggg consider two elements of film that need to be explored: effective teaching methods and the teacher variable (Lumsdaine and May34). A_Search for a Comparable Motion Picture Over a two-year period this researcher reviewed related studies and motion pictures, and failed to locate an experimental study comparable to this one. A study designed to integrate questioning strategies within a motion picture as stimulus to creative writing is, there- fore, unique. The two-year quest for a comparable study included 1. Four computerized searches of the ERIC system 2. A personal search of the Dissertation Abstracts, 1972-1977, and a search through the Comprehensive Dissertation Index (1861-1972). 3. Personal conversations with individuals in the motion picture industry 4. General research in the Michigan State University Library 5. A personal search through the Landers Film Reviews, a guide that describes existing 16mm instructional films (1942-1977) The various researches located studies and films that incorporated select elements of the present study, but none that included all of them. The Landers Film Reviews described several films under the heading Language 26 Arts that were designed to evoke feelings from words, music, and visuals. This type of film fits Adele Stern's35 comments on the film medium. She explains that a film takes place in a darkened room and that it involves the senses completely. This sensual concentration can be used as a powerful stimulus for the teaching of composition. The Landers reviews also described films designed without an ending or with an ambiguous ending; the inconclusive nature of these films offers teachers a point of departure for discussion. Several motion pictures designed to be stopped for discussion were located in the Landers film reviews. The films were produced by Churchill Films, and were described as open-ended, with stOpping points for discussion within the viewing; their ultimate goal was to stimulate creative writing. Bob Churchill, producer of Churchill films, offered to send the researcher four of the open-ended films.36 The researcher previewed each film, but found a vast difference between the description offered by Churchill and what was shown on the screen. The films show a teacher in a classroom setting discussing with students several stories (e.g., "Little Red Riding Hood," "Cinderella," etc.). The screen teacher, by means of questioning strategies, induces the screen children to think about the stories. At key points in the motion picture the screen teacher asks the students to perform a writing task during the next five minutes. The next shot 27 on the screen shows a sign that instructs the projectionist to stop the projector and to let the class viewing the film write for five minutes. After the writing, the projector is turned on again. The screen teacher appears and tells his own screen class to please stop writing, and the film lesson continues. This particular film design of Churchill's is vastly different from a design that (l) por- trays on the screen the story itself; and, (2) includes stOpping points for purposes of discussion. Other telephone calls were placed with the hope of locating films or studies comparable to this one. For example, Arlene Muskovitch, Educational Representative of the National Film Board of Canada, Province of Ontario, mentioned that the Provincial Government was developing a language arts curriculum that incorporated motion pictures, but that film was not being used in any specific way.37 Barbara Angel, of the National Film Board of Canada-- Prairies Region (Winnipeg, Manitoba), also mentioned that she knew of no films that were being used specifically to stimulate creative writing by means of student-teacher interaction.38 Film Studies: A Historical Perspective Numerous studies and projects on the use of motion pictures have been conducted throughout the last fifty years. Three of the most significant studies--the Educa- tional Motion Picture Project of the American Council on 28 Education, the University of Nebraska Film Project, and the Yale Motion Picture Research Project--are summarized on the following pages. 1. The Educational Motion Picture Project of the American Council on Education. The most comprehensive project related to film and education occurred over forty years ago. The Educational Motion Picture Project of the American Council on Education was organized in 1935 to . . . serve as a clearing house of information on the educational motion picture and to encourage the development and wider use of such pictures. Its problems center in film supply and production needs, distribution of films, and their use in the class- room.39 Over a five-year period the Motion Picture Project was involved, on a national scale, in all the areas it set out to investigate. In relation to this study, one of the most important segments of the Motion Picture Project was the program conducted in Tower Hill School (K-12), Wilmington, Delaware. The questions asked were 1. What is the function of motion pictures in education? 2. What educational objectives can specific films serve? 3. What are the strengths and weaknesses of existing films? 4. Is there one or are there several best ways of using films? 5. Can the same film be used on different grade levels for different purposes? 6. Are reactions of children on these different levels the same or different?40 29 The study was to be exploratory, without experi- mental interruptions of normal classroom situations. The answers to the six questions above were to be sought by using films in the normal activities of the school. Evaluation included judgment forms, anecdotal records kept by teachers, records of student expressions, interviews, film diaries, and paper and pencil tests. The project at Tower Hill included twenty-eight of thirty-five teachers in the school, and lasted from April 1938 to June 1939.41 The basic results of the Motion Picture Project included: (1) motion pictures can be used to establish a learning environment in which students and teachers can become effectively involved in different learning activities; (2) motion pictures can help improve instructional tech- niques; and, (3) motion pictures can help mould a dynamic curriculum.42 2. The University of Nebraska Film Project. Professional films were tested from 1945 to 1950 by the University of Nebraska43 with high school students in science and social studies classes. The purpose of the study was to enrich the existing curriculum as well as to create new areas of study. The evaluation of the films included standardized subject matter tests and tests composed of material in the motion pictures. The results of the Nebraska project were more specific than the Motion Picture Project conclusions. The Nebraska results included the following: 30 1. Films were effective in teaching facts and information 2. Bright students profit more from films 3. Teacher experience shows no difference in terms of film use 4. American History and general science were learned more by use of film than not44 3. The Yale Motion Picture Research Project. Between 1946 and 1954 the Yale Motion Picture Research Project45 evaluated experimental pilot teaching films and considered problems of production and utilization. The project looked at the effectiveness of specific components of film: the use of color versus the use of black-and—white, live action dialogue versus off-stage commentary, conscious inclusion of humor versus not including humor, and printed questions that appear on the screen versus no questions. The following are representative of the results of the project: 1. There is no difference between the use of color or black-and—white in relation to factual learning 2. The off-stage commentary is superior to live action dialogue in relation to factual learning 3. Humor did not increase learning 4. Printed questions inserted in the body of a film increase factual learning While later research results may have questioned or even modified findings from these studies, they must still be considered important milestones in the field of motion picture utilization. 31 There have been numerous individual research studies on film, as well as reviews of individual research studies. The studies reviewed below are related to those components of this study that concern the educational effectiveness of interrupting a film for student partici- pation. Film Research Related to This Study The location of questions during an instructional presentation has been investigated in both the print and film mode. Rothkopf and Bisbicos,46 for example, found that inserting questions before the presentation of factual prose material is more effective in retention of informa- tion than asking the questions after the material is 47 presented. Frase's study concurred with Rothkopf and Bisbicos. Kantor48 also investigated question position with instructional content; rather than using prose material, however, he used film. Kantor modified one film and used it three ways: film version A had questions inserted before the content appeared on the screen; film version B used identical questions after the content was shown; and, film version C was used as control (no ques- tions appeared in the film). The results of the study concluded that all three versions of the film were equally effective. Research exists on the effectiveness of stopping films for purpose of student involvement. Hovland, 32 Lumsdaine, and Sheffield,49 for example, found that audience participation during the viewing of a film (while the film is stopped) increases student learning. Travers,50 in addition, determined that the student's response during the time the film is stopped need not be overt; student participation is as effective to factual learning if the response is covert (i.e., mental practice by the student is as effective). The complexity of combining discussion with film in an experimental study was encountered by Howell.51 The purpose of the study was to compare the relative effects of two stimuli on student discussion. The first problem encountered concerned measuring discussion. There are two basic methods: quanitative and qualitative. The researcher chose the quantitative method; qualitative methods were . . . omitted because of its enormous complexity, and because there seems to be no clear basis for predicting how it might be affected by educational films. 52 The two stimuli compared in the study were: (1) films as stimuli for discussion; and, (2) topics (e.g., "science," "biology," etc.) as stimuli for discus- sion. A problem arose from the relative importance of four independent variables: the teacher, the students, the films, and the topics. It was decided to keep the teacher and the students constant, and to vary the films and the topics. This meant that the teachers would remain with their regular classes; the variable to be investigated 33 would be different films and different topics. This design makes the assumption that students and teachers are equal; there are several factors that question this assump- tion. First, the variety of the teachers' discussion methods as shown below. Some teachers in the study, for example, would lead the discussion totally, while other teachers removed them— selves from their central position and let the students conduct the discussion. Three different styles of discus- sion were noted; out of a total of five teachers in the study, two used one style, two used a second style, and the fifth teacher used a style different from the other four teachers. This third style was deemed unacceptable, and the teacher was not included in the experiment. This left four teachers and two styles of discussion. There were eight experimental classrooms, and each teacher was responsible for two. Since there are two styles of discussion, this total number (8) must be halved, leaving four experimental classrooms per discussion group. The following depicts this condition: Teachers using discussion Teachers using discussion method A method B Classroom 1 Classroom 5 Teacher 1 Teacher 3 Classroom 2 Classroom 6 Classroom 3 Classroom 7 TeaCher 2 Teacher 4 Classroom 4 Classroom 8 34 Howell's study admitted that discussion method A is dis- tinctly different from discussion method B. If the teacher is kept constant, the study, therefore, must eliminate either method A or method B; this reduces the total N by one-half. There is an additional related problem, however. When a teacher leads an open discussion, the students become psychologically intertwined. In terms of statisti- cal experimentation, the total classroom then becomes the subject (i.e., N = 1).53 There are four classrooms in either discussion group A or discussion group B of Howell's study; the total N, therefore, can only be a maximum of N = 4. This total is not enough to be statistically significant; an acceptable figure when performing research on human beings is N = 100 (Busk).54 Another problem concerned the films' inherent qualities: . . . there may have been an unavoidable bias favoring the films because producers of teaching films tend to select for filming topics of interest to pupils. Furthermore, some films are constructed for the purpose of provoking discus- sion.55 A related problem concerned the inequality of discussion time allotted to films and topic groups. Films took longer class time than the presentation of each topic; discussion of topics could begin, therefore, at an earlier time than the discussion after the films. Given a fixed amount of time per session, the time allotted for discussion was in favor of the topics. 35 The conclusions to the experiment were, ultimately: . . . the data obtained are not considered adequate to provide grounds for estimating the probabilities that films would be superior to topics. . . .56 The instructional value of using film in the natural classroom environment has been verified by several researchers; this characteristic is useful for two reasons. First, studies by Krasker,57 Knowlton and Tilton,58 and Hoban59 have determined that films used for instructional purposes are best used when shown in the normal environment of the student's classroom. Second, the unique values of film have remained hidden, in part, due to the methodological problems of research design. Conway, for example, states that . . . an enormous disparity has existed between experimental settings and relevant situations. . . .50 According to Simonson,61 a positive relationship exists between attitude and achievement; research indicates that when students have a positive attitude toward an area of learning they achieve in that area. When designing educational films, therefore, it would be wise to create a visual presentation that is specifically designed for the intended audience. Hoban and Ormer,62 in their summary of thirty-two years of film research, conclude that the instructional effectiveness of a film increases when an instructor applies principles of good instruction. Snider adds that As more and more research is done on the most effec- tive ways of using films to teach, it is becoming 36 apparent that . . . the teacher is one of the most important variables in determining how much a class will learn from a film.6 Jerome S. Bruner in The Process of Education makes a plea for a balanced perception of the merits of films and teachers: A perpetual feast of the best teaching films in the world, unrelated to other techniques of teaching, could produce bench-warming passivity.54 Bruner concludes his comments as follows: In sum, then, the teacher's task as communicator, model, and identification figure can be supported by a wise use of a variety of devices that expand experience, clarify it, and give it personal significance. There need be no conflict between the teacher and the aids of teaching. There will be no conflict if the development of aids takes into account the aims and the requirements of teaching. The film or television show as gimmick, the television system without substance or style in its programs, the pictographically vivid por- trayal of the trivial--these will help neither the teacher nor the student. Problems of quality in curriculum cannot be dodged by the purchase of sixteen-millimeter projection equipment. . . . The intelligent use of . . . resources now available will depend on how well we are able to integrate the technique of the film maker or the program producer with the technique and wisdom of the skillful teacher.65 Methodolo for Interaction: Teacher-FiIm—Students Unfortunately, many teachers today are not using good instructional strategies with motion pictures. ROthIGG for example, believes that teachers rely too much on media to teach, and not enough on their own ingenuity or ability. It is this lethargic teacher attitude that prompted Minor and Cafone to comment on the behavior of 37 teachers and students (i.e., viewers) when a film is shown in the classroom: Viewers operate with what we might call a "popcorn attitude" during viewing: they feel a break from the usual rigor of the classroom and they sit back, relax, and grab an imaginary bag of popcorn, and passively wait to be fed the message. Teachers, on the other hand--especially if they have viewed the film before--relax or busy themselves with some of the more mundane chores of their profes- sion, such as grading or checking papers.57 An active role can be taken by the teacher to create a dynamic classroom environment by use of film and student- teacher interaction. One approach to creating this classroom environment is to adapt Stauffer's Directed Reading Thinking Activity68 (also known as the D.R.T.A.) to include a motion picture. Stauffer, in the area of reading instruction, uses questioning strategies to promote thinking. His D.R.T.A. is an effective way to stimulate children in the classroom to think critically. According to Stauffer the D.R.T.A. is effective because it makes children use questioning techniques: Children must learn to ask questions, to analyze questions others raise, to seek answers with judg- ment suspended until all the facts are in to make wise decisions, and to act.69 In addition, Stauffer believes that group instruction is essential in the D.R.T.A. It is in the dynamics of a group interaction that the thinking-reading skills can be honed and polished. Inquiring minds, focused on the-same content, under the direction of a skilled teacher provide the wherewithal.70 38 In a D.R.T.A. the teacher leads the class in a group reading activity. The teacher sets the pace, and student- teacher interaction occurs before, during, or after the reading. Everyone has the same material before them: Insofar as materials are concerned, the one condi- tion that needs to be met in a group D.R.T.A. is that all in the group read and examine the sgmg material at the ggmg time. This means that any book--history, sc1ence, arithmetic, geography, or fiction--can be used as long as all in the group have a copy.71 The basic elements of the D.R.T.A., teacher- directed student-teacher interaction with the same material, are easily transferred to media. For example, instead of each child having the same book, the book's printed material can be transferred to an overhead trans- parency and projected on a screen; all student eyes are focused on the same material at the same time, and the teacher can control the rate of reading. The basic elements of the D.R.T.A. can also be adapted to incorporate language arts skills other than reading. For example, a tape recorder can replace the book, and the teacher can control the development of a listening activity by con- trolling the tape recorder. And a myriad of skills can be developed by using a motion picture with the D.R.T.A. Minor and Cafone72 suggest such an adaptation and call it the D.V.T.A. (Directed Viewing Thinking Activity). In a D.V.T.A., according to the authors, the teacher can lead a discussion before, during, or after the film viewing. Discussion during the viewing necessitates the stopping of 39 the projector; Minor and Cafone comment on where an appro- priate interruption might occur: . . . one where the teacher judges that sufficient new input has been provided in the film to allow viewers to accept or refute their initial predic- tions. . . . The number of times the film is stopped should depend upon the nature of the film, the learner's purpose in viewing, and the teacher's purpose in showing the film.73 Unfortunately, 16mm films designed for classroom use are not designed to be stopped while being viewed. If they are stopped, several problems arise that disrupt the film's continuity: (l) the sound, if not turned off before stop- ping the projector, phases out in a most unnatural and unpleasant manner; (2) the interruption of both visuals and sound will probably be abrupt, unnatural, and distracting because films today are not designed to be interrupted in that way. Films usually are designed to be seen as a whole unit; a disruption of the continuous message will destroy the continuity of the film; and (3) the teacher will generally have difficulty in determining where the stOp should be made because films are not designed to convey this information to the teacher. 'The solution to these problems is to design motion pictures with logical stopping points that can be used as guides to safeguard the film's continuity. With this film design it would be possible to adapt Stauffer's D.R.T.A. and create an effective Directed Viewing Thinking Activity. The D.V.T.A. could be guided by the teacher to develop any of the language arts skills. And there could be an added fillip to the design of the 40 film that would offer the teacher another opportunity for student-teacher interaction: an open-ended story. This is the film design created for this study. In this study's film design the students, after experiencing a viewing, listening, and thinking activity, are at a peak of concentration. Since no ending is fur- niShed, a logical closure is to urge the children to help the filmmakers by writing an ending to the unfinished story. This language arts activity will ease them out of the intense situation they are in. The film, a vicarious experience shared by the class and the teacher, is now transferred by the students to print. The extension from 74 for viewing to writing is a natural process; Stern, example, believes that all forms of writing--exposition, literary criticism, narration, dialoque, description, and poetry--have parallels in the film medium. The fusion of viewing and writing creates a powerful instructional ambience. But writing, in this study, will be more than the culminating experience of the viewing; it will also be the measure of the effectiveness of two viewing experi- ences, a massed presentation and a spaced presentation. It will be useful, therefore, to examine this language arts skill in greater detail. 41 Student Writing Historical Perspective Composition instruction in the United States has fluctuated periodically over the last hundred years between rigid formalism and a student-centered, expressionistic view. A study by Capps.75 showed that the period 1886-1926 brought many reforms against the rigid classroom procedures of the nineteenth century. A major thrust influencing the teaching of English came from the Report of the Committee of Ten published in 1894 by the National Educational Association. The report, according to Kantor,76 gave important recommendations for the teaching of composition. At the elementary level the report emphasized that . . . every thought which a child expresses can be deemed a proper subject for linguistic investiga- tion and that any school subject might serve the purpose of such expre531on.7 This new outlook resulted in the introduction of imagina- tive writing activities in the primary grades based upon observation and experience, primarily. Methods textbooks increasingly recommended a general approach to teaching primary school. Burke Hins- dale's 1896 text, Teaching the Language Arts, discussed the teaching of composition in a manner espoused by comtem- porary authors. According to Hinsdale78 there were two necessary qualities for effective composition: the incep- tion of ideas and the ordering of these ideas into sentences and paragraphs. Hinsdale believed that a 42 teacher's first responsibility was to encourage the child to express himself and thereby develop fluency and ease in language; formal grammar and rhetoric were not components of writing instruction. Percival Chubb79 suggested in 1902 that the child had a natural, inherent need to express himself, and that writing experiences could be designed to meet this need; it was up to the teacher to provide the means. And James Snoddy, author of "English Composition in the Elementary Schools," also believed in arousing student interest through personal experience. Snoddy believed that students should learn to write by writing, an approach that was . . . much more desirable and should be practiced instead of having students waste time in memorizing the senseless rules and endless details of the so-called English grammar.30 But in these early years of the twentieth century, other forces countered the movement toward a more experi- ential approach to composition. A trend toward higher efficiency in education, for example, exemplified by Thorndike's belief that student writing was measurable quantitatively, discouraged creativity in children's 81 The Hosic Report of 1917, on the other hand, writing. sought to combine efficiency in teaching with students' social needs. An important conclusion of the Report emphasized the close relationship between speaking and writing.82 43 The advent of World War I introduced specific use of composition to serve patriotic ideals. This resulted in a generally conservative, teacher-directed curriculum. In the 19208, however, a move toward English as art ensued, and composition again became student-centered. This was the beginning of the progressive era of education, repre- sented by the views of Rugg, Mearns, and Dewey.83 In 1935 the Experience Curriculum, produced by the Commission on the English Curriculum of the National Council of Teachers of English, emphasized creativity and pupil experience as integral to writing. The curriculum, however, was not accepted by all educators, and a growing divergence in educational opinion arose: the subjectivists, who believed in a psychological base to creativity, and the objectivists, who espoused a sociological view. World War II returned a perspective to writing that encompassed social efficiency and patriotism. After the war, conservative thinking expanded: a reaction to the progressive views of Rousseau and Pestalozzi and their twentieth century disciples, Rugg, Mearns, and Dewey.84 In addition, the focus on technology during the 19508 further restrained written creative expression. Not until Project English and the Dartmouth Seminar in the 19608 did children's creative expression become again defined as an important component of the English curriculum. Project English, with Jerome S. Bruner as its main spokesman, linked creative writing with cognitive learning 44 and intellectual development, whereas the Dartmouth Seminar, composed of authors such as James Moffett and John Dixon, stressed the affective aspects of the process of writing. Unfortunately, the trend toward a student-centered curriculum begun in the 19608 remains in theory and not in practice. Robards,85 for example, surveying textbooks used in 1973 found that they contained lessons on composi- tion but that they placed more emphasis on the mechanics of writing than on any other aspect of the instructional program. It seems, therefore, that during the last hundred years children's writing in school has vacillated between emphasis on mechanical aspects of writing and freedom of expression. Today, theorists stress that children must be self-directed in their writing; today's classrooms, how- ever, continue to put more attention on the mechanics of writing than on the thought and feelings of young writers (Smith,86 Jone887). Authorities do not identify one single, superior 88). There is method for instruction in writing (Lundsteen support in the research, however, for various components of an elementary school writing program. Some of these aspects are reported below. 45 Stimulating Writing: Audio- visuals and Other DEvices The psychologist Sheviakov89 suggests four con- cepts that motivate children to write: (1) self- competency--children want to feel competent and to respect themselves for it; (2) modeling--children want to identify with a competent adult figure; (3) personal acceptance-- children want to be respected, accepted, forgiven, under- stood, and loved; and, (4) peer status--children want to be liked by their classmates. These four concepts are interrelated and although they are useful in describing possible reasons why children would want to write, they do not specify how a given instructional strategy might 90 observes this problem induce a child to write. Lundsteen from a perspective that uses two concepts: motivation and stimulation. Stimulation to write arises from an outside influence, whereas motivation results from an inner- directed drive. Most studies concern stimulating devices 91 on the other hand, investigated or procedures. Kafka, writing as an inner-directed procedure. Kafka studied the effects on children's writing of four procedures: (1) auditory stimulus; (2) visual stimulus; (3) tactile stimulus; and, (4) no sensory stimuli. The children who were exposed to no stimuli produced higher quality papers, and Kafka concluded that children tend to write better 92 from an internal stimulus. Lundsteen's review of the Kafka study, however, warns that the results might have 46 been biased due to (l) the children's unfamiliarity with the researcher and the three outside stimuli, and (2) the tentativeness of the evaluation instrument. Graves93 also concluded that inner-directed writing is superior to outer-motivated writing. Emig,94 on the other hand, declares that subsequent studies contradict this specific finding by Graves. Nonetheless, Emig suggests that teachers consider the possible values of letting children make their own decisions on writing tasks. The majority of studies on children's writing, however, fall in the area of devices used as stimuli. For 95 researched children's example, Golub and Fredrick writing under different stimulus conditions. The study compared differences in the writing of upper elementary students when two stimuli, pictures and instructions for writing, were presented in various forms. The stimuli were categorized as (1) general versus specific instruc- tions to students, (2) color versus black-and-white pictures, and (3) concrete versus abstract pictures. The writing samples were taken in the students' regular language arts classrooms. Eighty fourth graders and eighty sixth graders participated; there were eight class- rooms in the study. The pictures and the instructions were randomly assigned within each of the eight classrooms. Each subject received both the instructions and a picture, read and studied them, and wrote a response. Three raters evaluated the written responses using their own intuition; 47 no instructions were given to the raters on the criteria to be used. Their correlations were .64, .66, and .80. The results of the analysis showed no difference in writing based on the instructions given to students. A difference was found between color and black-and-white pictures in favor of the black-and-white images. Lastly, no difference was found between concrete and abstract pictures as they relate to writing quality. Freden96 investigated three stimuli on ninth grade students' responses to films: (1) an introduction to a film that included the film's title, director, awards, and film subject; (2) an introduction to a film that included film title, director, awards, film subject, and two questions related to the film; and (3) an introduction that included only the film's title. After viewing, the students wrote Opinions and reactions to the films. Two independent raters evaluated the writings using the Purves categories instrument for literature. Differences detected: introduc- tions to films did result in higher quality writing. Uehara97 conducted a study to investigate the effectiveness of three different stimuli on the quality of children's writing. The three stimuli were (1) a set of pictures; (3) a recording of a series of environmental sounds; and, (3) a filmrwithout-words. The total pOpula- tion consisted of one class of third graders and one class of fifth graders in a middle class, southwestern city. The pupils in each class were divided into three groups. 48 Each of the three groups wrote a composition after being exposed to the stimuli. The total rotation took nine days. The student writings were analyzed quantitatively using Hunt's T-unit; the number of different adjectives per one hundred words; the number of coordinate nominal, and relative clauses; and, a type-token ratio. The quality of writing was determined by the Carlson Analytical Scale for Measuring the Originality of Children's Stories. The analysis of the data, using a two-way three-factor analysis of variance with repeated measures, showed no difference among the three stimuli. 98 concerned the effects on A study by Ewing children's writing of four experimental conditions: (1) no stimulus--the children were simply asked to write a story; (2) an auditory stimulus--the children wrote after hearing musical selections; (3) a visual stimulus--the children wrote after viewing a film without words; and (4) motor stimulus--the children wrote after drawing a picture. The study included sixty-four third graders in three schools; each student wrote after being exposed to each of the four stimuli. Ewing was interested in possible differences in total number of words written, the total number of dif- ferent sentence structures used, the number of different words used, and the T-unit length. The written pieces were rated by two methods: a frequency count and the evaluation of five trained judges. Non-parametric 49 .statistics were used in the analysis of the data, and the results at the .05 level showed that the no-stimulus group performed best overall, followed by the auditory stimulus, the visual stimulus, and the motor stimulus. The results of a related research question are of interest: differences by sex were significant, with girls superior to boys in fluency, vocabulary, and T-unit length. Also, the most effective stimulus for the girls, the no-stimulus treatment, was the leat effective stimulus for the boys. Huntington99 used a film without words as a stimu- lus to writing. He measured the syntactic complexity of the writing of sixth graders under three different post- viewing variables: (1) delay in the writing after the viewing; (2) reviewing the film content after the viewing; and (3) viewing the film a second time. Huntington found no difference among any of the various presentations. Edmundloo compared vicarious versus direct experiences as stimuli to written expression. He found that vicarious experiences from books, television, radio, and films were a greater stimulus to writing than experiences taken from the children's own lives. The studies reviewed above relate to stimulation of children's writing by physical devices such as sound, pictures, films, etc. The spoken word, in the form of questions, can also serve as a stimulus to writing. The next section explores the use of questioning strategies and their effects on children's composition. 50 Stimulating Writing: Questioning Strategies The value of questioning for stimulating creative writing is, according to DeHaven,101 two-fold: (1) question— ing engages the teacher with the student to encourage and guide creative thinking; (2) well-phrased questions will keep the student at the center of the learning activity. DeHaven adds: . . . not random questions but a carefully structured sequence of questions that would serve as stimuli to pique students' intellectual curiosity and cause them to interact with words and ideas.102 Laque and Sherwoodl’03 agree with DeHaven by suggesting that the student and the teacher share in the writing process through an inductive, dialectical approach, a process that is . . . thinking, questioning, and doing, doing, ques- tioning, and thinkingi and thinking in what may be a never-ending cycle. 04 The importance of questioning is further emphasized by Laque and Sherwood when they affirm that Socrates himself was suspicious of writing because it lacked the dialectical interplay of inter- locutors; he felt that probing questions were necessary in order to arrive at the truth.105 And Hunkins adds that Questions must serve as guides by which students develop more in-depth perceptions. The teacher can ask questions to act as a catalyst to students' thinking. The teacher can formulate questions that direct and guide students in various avenues of search.106 The teacher, therefore, must understand what constitutes good questions and questioning strategies. Hunkins has 51 devised a methodology of questioning strategies based on Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives: knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evalu- ation. Hunkins then lists a series of steps that lead to the formulation of effective questions: first, become knowledgeable in the different types of questions one might ask (i.e., to be aware, in a general sense, of the types of questions one wishes to ask); next, analyze the educational situation in which the questions will be asked (i.e., the students' background, interests, age, grade level, school, and environment). Goals and objectives of specific ques- tions comprise step 3: do the questions fit the given situation? Step 4 concerns the types of questions one might ask: where do they fit in Bloom's taxonomy? Next, consider the instructional content and experiences one wishes to address by questioning: questions are vital elements of content; they must assist in the achievement of objectives and should facilitate the development of higher order abstractions, concepts, and generalizations.107 Two additional considerations that lead to the formulation of effective questions include (1) the time framework (high level questions take longer for deve10pment than lower level questioning; if the class time allows fifteen minutes, then high level questioning would probably not be appropriateh:and (2) the wording of the questions (i.e., is it at an understandable syntactic 52 level? Does it relate directly to the students' prior experience and current class situation?). Hunkins states that there are four possible func- tions of any questioning strategy: centering, expansion, distribution, and ordering.108 Centering is used to converge students' thinking on a particular topic. This concept is usually used at the introductory stage of a given tOpic and can involve all levels of Bloom's Taxonomy. Expansion helps students to extend their thinking; this concept helps students in divergent thinking. Distribution and order functions are closely related. Distribution offers a variety of ques- tions to the given discussion, a variety based on the dynamics of the ongoing teacher/student dialogue. The last strategy, order questions, is concerned with classroom management; it provides rules for class investigation and rules for conduct. Two of Hunkin's questioning categories are specific to this study: centering and expansion. These two are the most important to convergent and divergent thinking. In convergent thinking . . . the individual converges on patterns in a logical manner, a narrowing of prospects in the field, a closing in of definition as already established. These are tested or seen in new situations.109 In divergent thinking the individual . . . moves out from a given situation and imagines many divergent possibilities, breaking away from formula and fact or established interpretations, experimenting and exploring with novel combina- tions.110 53 Smith111 declares that both convergent and divergent thinking are essential to learning. Experiments show, unfortunately, that divergent thinking is generally ignored by teachers; children, in fact, are sometimes penalized for using divergent thinking strategies (Smithllz). Of these two types of thinking (convergent and divergent), divergent is the most important to this study because it leads to an outward expansion of know- ledge; this characteristic fits the questioning strategies and the open-ended nature of the experimental film. The importance of questioning to education, as can be seen from the above, is widely acknowledged. And yet, as Lowery explains, . . . research studies on questioning as a means of teaching, both in instructional settings and in empirical investigations, are rare. The following researches, nonetheless, were found to be related to this study. Manzoll’4 conducted an investigation to test the effectiveness of a questioning strategy designed to improve reading comprehension. The forty-one students in the study ranged from age seven to age twenty-five; all were in a remedial reading program at Syracuse University. Students were assigned to one of two groups: (1) an experimental group that incorporated questioning strategies designed to induce children to raise their own questions; (2) a control group that received no stimulus from questioning. Exposure to each of the two treatments 54 was on an individual, tutorial basis, 1 1/2 hours per day. Results of the experiment, based on a standardized reading test, showed that the experimental group did significantly better than the control group in mean reading comprehension scores. The experimental group was also found to (1) ask a greater number of questions, and (2) ask questions at a higher level of complexity than the control group. Vance115'designed two sets of questioning strate- gies based on Bloom's taxonomy of the cognitive domain: high order questions and low order questions. The researcher wished to determine if there was a difference in the two sets of questions as they affect students' attitude and critical thinking. One-hundred sixteen students were randomly assigned to the two sets of ques- tioning strategies. Using the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal instrument and a teacher-developed Semantic Differential Scale, the researcher found that students exposed to high order questioning performed better in critical thinking abilities related to evaluation of arguments, and had a higher conceptual attitude of toler- ance than students exposed to the low order questioning. Lucking116 compared the effectiveness of teacher training and questioning strategies. The students in this study were asked to write essays after being exposed to three treatments: (1) no instructions to students con- cerning the essay they were to write; (2) instructions to students given by teachers without special training in 55 questioning skills; and (3) instructions to students by teachers trained in hierarchically-ordered questioning. A team of evaluators rated the essays using the Purves content analysis instrument; five categories were analyzed (Engagement, Perception, Interpretation, Evaluation, and Miscellaneous). Significance was determined at the .05 level for Interpretation and Evaluation. Conclusions derived from the analysis of the data show that teachers trained in hierarchically-ordered questioning techniques have a positive influence on student writing. Mayo117 investigated the effects of questioning strategies on the descriptive writing of tenth grade students. Six classes of tenth graders (Total N = 166) were assigned to three treatment groups: (1) students who received training in discussion skills and discussed the writing assignment prior to writing; (2) students who did not receive training in discussion skills but who discussed the writing assignment prior to writing, and (3) students who were not exposed to prior training or discussion. The training and discussion prior to writing concerned techniques in divergent and convergent questioning. Two raters evaluated the writing samples on the following criteria: overall effectiveness, content, organization, style, mechanics, and total score. A 3x2x2 analysis of covariance determined that students who were exposed to divergent questioning strategies provided higher quality 56 writing than the students who participated in convergent questioning. Up to this point Chapter II includes some historical viewpoints, several opinions by different authors, and various reviews of research studies, all related to this study's major concern: the use of film and student-teacher interaction to stimulate children to write. The section that follows, evaluation of writing, concludes the chapter. Evaluation of Writing As Lundsteen declares in Help for the Teacher of Composition: To evaluate something as personal and complex as writing is not a simple matter. . . . The profes- sional literature suggests an abundance of ways to encourage children to write but does not have nearly as much on how to evaluate what is written.118 The complexity of the writing act demands that its methods of evaluation be broad and deep. Lundsteen suggests that writing evaluation should be considered from the following methodological perspectives: 1. Methods to assess process as well as product 2. Methods to assess qualitative as well as quan- titative improvement 3. Methods to assess the works of younger children ' as well as those of older children 4. Methods to assess different forms of writing, such as prose-fact, prose-fiction, and poetry.119 .Huntlzo has developed one successful quantitative method of evaluating writing. He has devised a basic unit of meaning known as the T-unit: one main clause and its 57 modifiers, if any. The basic unit can be tallied, giving a written piece a quantitative score. Lundsteen121 states that other purely quantitative measures have proven to be too simple (e.g., comparing a count of simple versus complex sentences and drawing conclusions as to the quality of the writing based on this sum). One method of writing evaluation observes the process of writing as well as the product (Hillerichlzz). A rationale for this method is that to the elementary school child the act of writing is as important, and perhaps more important, than the finished piece; it is advantageous, therefore, to consider the process of writing as a valid measure of writing productivity. The Graves123 study, for example, is a comprehensive examination of the writing process of seven year olds. The study included other areas that affect the children's writing, such as peer relationships, class requirements, and the classroom environment of four second-grade classes. The main objective of Graves' research concerned the case study of eight children from the two claseroms; all students, however, were included to a certain extent to avoid isolating the students under observation and making them self-conscious. Records were kept of the activities occurring in the classroom as students wrote, and assigned writings, as well as unassigned writings, were analyzed for length, content, and total productivity. The study is unique: 58 (l) the research is conducted in the natural classroom setting; (2) the complex relationships that exist during the writing process are considered. The major conclusions of the study include the following: 1. Children who have a free choice in writing will write more and longer pieces than children who are given specific assignments. 2. Girls prefer formal environments for writing, whereas boys prefer informal environments. Graves found that unassigned writing resulted in four times as much writing as the assigned writing. Emig124 reports, however, that subsequent studies seem to contradict this specific conclusion of Graves. Emig suggests, nonetheless, that teachers of composition should consider letting their students choose their own writing experiences. Another method of evaluating writing concerns a Gestalt approach to the written piece. Gestalt implies . . . an organized configuration or pattern of experiences or of acts.1 5 General patterns within writing are considered by holistic evaluation, a term derived from its emphasis on the rater's impression of the whole piece of writing rather independent aspects of the whole, such as style, content, mechanics, etc. (Mellon125). This rating technique has been researched and used extensively by the Educational Testing Service. It is functional when three criteria are kept in mind by the raters: l. The individual essays are evaluated in relation to the others in the particular group being 59 analyzed, not in relation to some external standard. 2. The raters must use all the rating categories a certain minimum percentage of the time--this insures that the total group of essays will be normally distributed. 3. The raters should not favor any one outstanding quality of a given piece. The raters must give all the qualities of a given essay equal merit. This warns the raters to guard against personal biases due to content, humor, style, etc.127 Diederich, a specialist in testing and measurement, emphasizes that holistic scoring techniques can be very reliable, and adds that a reliability of .80 is acceptable in measuring schoolwork. Reliability, according to Diederich, is increased if essays are graded based upon the 128 rater's first impression. In holistic scoring the rater does not make corrections or revisions in the paper. The procedure is very effective: Where there is commitment and time to do the work required to achieve reliability of judgment, holistic evaluation of writing remains the most valid and direct means of rank-ordering students by writing ability. Spending no more than two minutes on each paper, raters . . . can achieve a scoring reliability as high as .90 for individual writers. The scores provide a reliable rank- ordering of writers, an ordering which can then be used to make decisions about placement, special instruction, graduation, or grading. Since holistic evaluation can be as reliable as multiple- choice testing and since it is always more valid, it should have first claim on our attention when we need scores to rank-order a group of students.129 Cooper gives the following general description of holistic evaluation: . . . any procedure which stops short of enumerating linguistic, rhetorical, or informational features of a piece of writing. Some holistic procedures 60 may specify a number of particular features and even require that each feature be scored separately, but the reader is never required to stop and count or tally incidents of the feature. The reader uses the list of features as a general guide--a set of reminders a way of focusing--in reaching a holistic judgment.130 In more specific terms, Cooper gives seven types of holis- tic evaluation techniques: essay scale, analytic scale, dichotomous scale, feature analysis, primary trait scoring, center of gravity response, and general impression marking. Each one of these seven is considered below. The essay scale dates to the 19208 and 19308, when it was widely used by teachers and researchers; it is seldom used today. This technique incorporates a rank- ordering of the papers to be evaluated. The first step is to identify the highest quality paper and the lowest quality paper. The rest of the pieces are thereafter matched to these two extremes. The criteria for grouping and ranking the papers include realization (i.e., sincerity, spontaneity, and vividness); comprehension of subject matter; organization; density of information (i.e., the quantity of unique and significant information); and, control of written language, including rhetoric and syntax. The analytic scale lists prominent features or characteristics of the written piece. The features listed usually number ten or twelve, and each feature is sub- divided into three quality rankings: high, middle, or low. The analytic scale sample that appears on Table 2.1 was designed to evaluate the writing of college freshmen: 61 Table 2.1.--Analytic Scale. Low Middle High General Merit Ideas 2 4 6 8 10 Organization 2 4 6 8 10 Wording 1 2 3 4 5 Flavor 1 2 3 4 5 _____ Mechanics Usage 1 2 3 4 5 Punctuation l 2 3 4 5 Spelling 1 2 3 4 5 Handwriting 1 2 3 4 5 _____ Total A dichotomous scale comprises a series of state- ments that ask if certain criteria have been met; each statement is answered yes or no. This scale is useful in evaluating and comparing groups of essays, but is a bit too general for reliable scoring of individual written pieces. On Table 2.2 appears a sample of a dichotomous scale designed by Cooper.131 Feature analysis concentrates on a particular feature of a given piece of writing, such as its structure. For example, an instrument designed to measure the descriptive writing quality of a specific piece of writing would have nine categories of evaluation: indicated order, 62 Table 2.2.--Dichotomous Scale. Yes No Statement Content I. Organization II. Mechanics III. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. Ideas themselves are insightful. Ideas are creative or original. Ideas are rational or logical. Ideas are expressed with clarity. There is a thesis. Order of thesis idea is followed throughout the essay. Thesis is adequately developed. Every paragraph is relevant to the thesis. Each paragraph has a controlling idea. Each paragraph is developed with relevant and concrete details. The details that are included are well ordered. There are many mis- spellings. There are serious punctuation errors. Punctuation errors are excessive. There are errors in the use of verbs. There are errors in use 'of pronouns. There are errors in use of modifiers. There are distracting errors in word usage. The sentences are awkward. 63 principle of selection, methods of arrangement, syntax, balance, organization, connectives, openings, and conclusion. Feature analysis is flexible. It enables teachers and researchers to develOp a scale for other structures of writing; Cooper gives as examples . . . voice and style of personal disclosure in autobiographical writing; structure or pattern in fictional prose; use of details and sensory images in writing up observations and interviews. . . .132 Primary trait scoring yields a reliable score when raters are given training. The rating guides in primary trait scoring direct the rater's attention to just those features of the piece that are relevant: . . . to the special blend of audience, speaker role, purpose, and subject required by that kind of disclosure and by the particular writing task.133 Center of gravity response is not intended for scoring but for formative response and feedback. It gives students a general outlook on his efforts, not on mistakes of spelling and usage. The rater reads the paper being evaluated and responds to it by paraphrasing what the writer said. After, the rater shows the writer the para- phrasing, and both begin a dialogue on the writer's piece. Lastly, general impression marking requires no detailed discussion of features and no summing of scores given to separate features. The rater decides where a paper fits within the range of papers being evaluated. This method has been developed by the Educational Testing Service and the College Entrance Examination Board to score 64 134 the English Composition Test and the Advanced Placement 135 These two examinations are evaluated Test in English. by raters who receive special training in this technique. On the other hand, James Britton and his colleagues at the University of London Institute of Education have achieved reliabilities as high as .82 between raters who, although experienced English teachers, were given only minimal instructions in the process (the raters, in fact, did not know each other, lived in different parts of England, and conducted their ratings through the mail). The rating scales used in general impression marking vary. The Educational Testing Service used a scale of l to 4 in the English Composition Test and a scale of l to 8 in the Advanced Placement Test. The National Assessment of Educational Progress uses a 1 to 8 scale, and James Britton 0 to 10.136 In summary, holistic-general impression marking techniques are adaptable to this study for the following reasons: (1) it is a valid technique for rank-ordering a set of papers; (2) it is a reliable instrument; (3) it is convenient in that it requires no detailed discussion of features and no summing of scores given to separate features of the papers. Summary The purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of two uses of a silent motion picture on the 65 creative writing performance of fourth and fifth grade students. There are various components in the study's design: 1. The use of film in the language arts classroom 2. Film as stimulus to creative writing 3. Student-teacher interaction as stimulus to creative writing 4. Evaluation of writing 5. Instructional effectiveness of a motion picture designed to be stopped for student participation A search of the literature failed to locate a comparable study. Nonetheless, related researches compose a mosaic that, inductively, gives the study an empirical base. At the center of all school learning is language, a means of creative expression that permeates one's total existence. Educators believe that this ubiquitous quality disallows a fragmented approach to language teaching; it is believed a holistic approach is more effective than the use of traditional segments such as mechanics, grammar, etc. In addition, it is believed that experiential activi- ties will offer the child a relevant and practical approach to learning language. Children today are competent in the language of film; this medium of expression could be used effectively as a vicarious language learning experience. Unfortu- nately, although films have been used in education for over fifty years, its.instructional value is still contested by some authors. A current trend that attempts 66 to define how films teach is to observe specific attributes of this medium and thereby build a theoretical base. This study does not look at specific attributes of film; it considers film as an entity that is most effective when used correctly by a teacher. The study investigates two ways of using one motion picture: student-teacher inter- action within the viewing versus student-teacher inter- actions after the viewing. The basic idea is to design a film that can be stopped at key points for student-teacher interaction without disrupting the film's continuity. A search of the literature failed to uncover a film, or a film study, designed to incorporate student-teacher interaction in this manner. Related studies were found that offered pertinent, useful information. The culminating activity of the student-teacher interaction in both film presentations is writing. Most studies on methods of stimulating creative writing compare the effectiveness of various devices, such as pictures, music, sound effects, stories, or films; no single device has been found superior. A few studies concern questioning techniques as stimulation to writing. It is unfortunate that so little has been done in this area because ques- tioning is an effective instructional technique. Lastly, holistic-general impression evaluation procedures of writing are reliable, effective, and easily 67 adapted to the rigors of teaching; this method is ideal for this study's experimental design. CHAPTER II NOTES 1Walter T. Petty, Dorothy C. Petty, and Marjorie F. Becking, Experiences in Languagg (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1976), p. 6. 28mith et al., Language and Thinking in School, p. 428. 3Moffett and Wagner, Student-Centered Language Arts and Reading, p. 36. 4Ibid., p. 16. 5Sara W. Lundsteen, Children Learn to Communicate New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1976), p. 3. 6L. S. Vygotsky, Thought and Language (Cambridge, Massachusetts: M.I.T. Press, 1962), p. 44;iin E. B. Smith, Language and Thinking in School, p. 15. 7Smith et al., Language and Thinking in School, p. 15. 8John Dixon, Growth Through English (Oxford University Press, 1969), p. 112. 9W. Willard Wirtz, interviewed by Harold G. Shane, "The Academic Score Decline: Are the Facts the Enemy of Truth?" Phi Delta Kappan (October 1977):86. lophillips, Learning Through Pyramid Films, p. i. 11Moffett and Wagner, Student-Centered Language Arts and Reading. 12Lundsteen, Children Learn to Communicate. 68 69 l3Petty et al., Experiences in Language. 14Moffett and Wagner, Student-Centered Languagg Arts and Reading. 15Smith et al., Language and Thinking in School, p. 336. 16Marion C. Sheridan, Thg_Motion Picture and the Tgaching of English (New York: NCTE, Appleton-Century- Crofts, 1965), p. vii. l7Ibid. 18Emile G. McAnany, S.J. and Robert Williams, S.J., The Filmmaker's Handbook (GlenRock, New Jersey: Deus Books, Paulist Press, 1965), pp. 64-65. 19Northrop Frye, quoted in A Curriculum in Film, by John S. Katz, Curriculum Series 13, The Ontario Insti- tute for Studies in Education, n.d., p. 3. 20Jerrold E. Kemp, Planning and ProducinggAudio— visual Materials (Chandler PubliShing Co., I968). P. 3? 21J. Miller, S. Levine, and J. Sternberger, "The Effects of Different Kinds of Review and of Subtitling on Learning from a Training Film (a replicative study)," unpublished, 1952; in John 0. Cook, "Research in Audio- Visual Communication," Visual Communication (Washing- ton, D.C.: AECT, 1960), p. 100. 22R. A. Hooper, "A Diagnosis of Failure," A-V Communications Review 17 (1969):245-64; in John 0. Cook, Visual Communication, p. 100. 23Abram W. VanderMeer, "Relative Effectiveness of Instruction by: Films Exclusively, Films plus Study Guides, and Standard Lecture Methods," Pennsylvania State College, July 1950, ERIC Doc. 053567. 24Arthur B. Goodwin, Handbook of Audiovisual Aids and Techniques for Teaching Elementary School Suhjects YNew York: Parker Publishing Company, Inc., 1969), p. 60. 70 25Phillips, Learning Through Pyramid Films, p. i. 26Goodwin, Handbook of Audiovisual Aids, p. 60. 27Phillips, Learning Through Pyramid Films, p. i. 28Mark A. May and Arthur A. Lumsdaine, Learning From Films (New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 1958)] p. 2. 29 U 0 a I O Travers, Audiov1sua1 Information Transm1881on, p. 2. 3°Ibid. lGavriel Salomon and Richard E. Clark, "Reexamin- ing the Methodology of Research on Media and Technology in Education," Review of Educational Research 47 (Winter l977):103. 32May and Lumsdaine, Learning From Films, p. 2. 33Ibid., p. s. 34lbid., p. 2. 35Adele H. Stern, "Using Films in Teaching English Composition," English Journal 57 (May 1968):646; ERIC Doc. ED 031 477. 36Telephone conversation with Bob Churchill, Churchill Films, Thursday, 19 January 1978. 37Telephone conversation with Arlene Muskovitch, Educational Representative, National Film Board of Canada, Province of Ontario, 26 January 1978. 38Telephone conversation with Barbara Angel, Educational Representative, National Film Board of Canada, Prairie Region, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Wednesday, 18 January 1978. 39American Council on Education Studies, The Motion Picture in Education (Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education, 1937), p. 6. 71 4olbid., p. 10. 41American Council on Education Studies, A School Useg a Motion Picture (Washington, D.C.: American CounciI on Education, 1940), p. 14. 42wesley C. Meierhenry, Enriching the Curriculum Through Motion Pictures (Lincoln, Nebraska: University of NebraSka Press, 1952), p. 21. 431bid. 44Ibid., pp. 87-161. 4SLumsdaine and May, Learning From Films. 46Ernst Z. Rothkopf and Ethel E. Bisbicos, "Selective Facilitative Effects of Interspersed Questions on Learning From Written Materials," Journal of Educational Psychology 58 (February l967):56-6l. 47Lawrence T. Frase, "Effect of Question Location, Pacing, and Mode upon Retention of Prose Material," Journal of Educational Psychology 59 (1968):244-49. 48Bernard J. Kantor, "An Exploratory Study of the Effects of Inserted Questions in the Body of Instructional Films" (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Southern California, 1959). 49Hovland et al., Experiments in Mass Communication. 50 I O O l I Travers, AudioV1sual Information Transm1881on. 51John J. Howell, "The Effects of Educational Films on Student Participation in Discussion" (Ph.D. disserta- tion, Yale University, 1954); in Lumsdaine and May, Learning From Films, pp. 211-27. 52Lumsdaine and May, Learning From Films, p. 213. 53Conversation with Dr. Joseph Byers, Coordinator of Office of Consultation Research, College of Education, Michigan State University, Wednesday, 25 January 1978. 72 4Conversation with Dr. Patricia Busk, Counseling Personnel Services, College of Education, Michigan State University, 10 May 1977. 55Lumsdaine and May, Learning From Films, p. 218. 561bid., p. 227. 57Abraham Krasker, "A Critical Analysis of the Use of Motion Pictures by Two Methods," The Educational Screen 20 (l941):303-13; in Walter A. Wittich and John G. Fowlkes, Audiovisual Paths to Learning (Harper and Brothers Pub- lishingfi1952): p. 21. 58D. C. Knowlton and J. W. Tilton, Motion Pictures in History Teaching (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1929); in Wittich and Fowlkes, Audiovisual Paths to Learning, p. 21. 59Charles F. Hoban, Focus on Learning (Washing- ton, D.C.: American Council on Education, Committee on Motion Pictures in Education, 1942); in Wittich and Fowlkes, Audiovisual Paths to Learning, p. 21. 60J. K. Conway, "Multiple Sensory Modality and Problem of Sign Types," A-V Communications Review (1967): 375. 61Michael R. Simonson, "Liking and Learning Go Hand in Hand," Audiovisual Instruction 23 (March 1978):18. 62Charles F. Hoban and Van Ormer, Instrggtional Film Research 1918-1950 (Rapid Mass Learning), Technical Report No. SDC 269-7-19, NAVEXOS P-977, Special Devices Center, Long Island, New York, 1951; in Snider, "Selection and Use of Visual Media," p. 127. 63Snider, "Selection and Use of Visual Media," .p. 127. 64Jerome S. Bruner, The Process of Education (New York: Vintage Books, 1963), p. 88. 65 Ibid., pp. 91-92. 73 66Audrey J. Roth, "Success and Distress in a Media- Oriented Classroom,‘l paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Southeast Conference on English in the Two-Year College, February 1974, ERIC Doc. 090548. 67Billy J. Minor and Hal Cafone, "Reading Tech- niques Make Media Meaningful," Audiovisual Instruction 22 (December l977):19-20. 68Russell G. Stauffer, Teaching Reading as a Thinking Process (New York: Harper and Row, Inc., 1969). 69Ibid., p. xvi. 7olbid. 71Ibid., p. 154. 72Minor and Cafone, "Reading Techniques Make Media Meaningful," p. 19. 731bid., p. 20. 74Stern, "Using Films in Teaching English Composi- tion," p. 646. 75Barbara H. Capps, "The Past ig Prologue," View- points 50 (Bloomington: Indiana University, January 1954), p. 0 76Kenneth J. Kantor, "Creative Expression in the English Curriculum: An Historical Approach," Research in the Teaching of English 9 (Champaign, Illinois: NCTE, Spring 1975): P. 7. 77Ibid. 783. A. Hinsdale, Teaching the Language Arts: Speech, Reading, Composition (APPIeton, New York, 1896); in Capps,“The Past i§ Prologue," p. 11. 79Percival Chubb, The Teachingiof English (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1902); in Kantor, "Creative Expression in the English Curriculum," p. 8. 74 80James S. Snoddy, "English Composition in Elemen- tary Schools," Education 20 (February 1900):353-61; in Capps, "The Past i§fPrologue," p. 14. 81Kantor, "Creative Expression in the English Curriculum," p. 7. 82Ibid. 83Ibid., p. 13. 84Ibid., p. 21. 85Shirley N. Robards, "Teachers, Textbooks, and Tribulations," Viewpoints 50 (Bloomington: Indiana Univer- sity, January 1974), p. 34. 86Smith et al., ignguage and Thinking in School, pp. 241-42. 87Tudor Powell Jones, Creative Learning in Perspgc- tive (New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1972), p. 39. 88Sara W. Lundsteen, Help for the Teacher of Written Composition (Champaign: NCRE, 1976), p. 35. 89G. V. Sheviakov, "Teaching the Disadvantaged" (tape cassette album #5)(Los Angeles: Listener Corporation, 1971); in Lundsteen, Help for the Teacher of Written Composition, pp. 29-33. 90Lundsteen, Heip for the Teacher of Written Cgmposition, p. 33. 91T. T. Kafka, "A Study of the Effectiveness of Four Motivational Stimuli on the Quality of Composition of Intermediate Students in One School District" (Ph.D. dissertation, St. John's University, 1971), Bissertation Abstracts International 32 (l97l):2549A; in Lundsteen, Help for the Teacher of Written Composition, p. 35. 92Lundsteen, Heip for the Teacher of Written Composition, p. 35. 75 93D. H. Graves, "Children's Writing: Research Directions and Hypotheses Based Upon an Examination of the Writing Processes of Seven-Year-Old Children" (Ph.D. dissertation, State University of New York at Buffalo, 1973), Dissertation Abstracts International 34 (1974): 6255A; in LundSteen, Help for the TeaCher of Written Composition, pp. 13-14. 94Janet Emig, tape recording of speech delivered at Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, 13 April 1978, "Research on Writing." 95Lester S. Golub and Wayne C. Fredrick, "An Analysis of Children's Writing Under Different Stimulus Conditions," Research in the Teachin of English 4 (Champaign: NCTE, Fall 1970): PP. 16 -80. 96Sharon E. Freden, "The Effects of Planned Introductions on the Written Responses of Selected Ninth Grade Students to Selected Short Experiential Films," University of Colorado, 1973, Dissertation Abstracts 34 (June l974):7464-65. 97Uehara, "Effects of Three Different Stimuli on Third and Fifth Grade Written Composition." 98Ewing, "Influence of Stimuli on Written Composi- tion of Selected Third Grade Children." 99Huntington, "Effects of Instructional Variables in Children's Written Composition." 100N. R. Edmund, "Relationship Between Prior Experiences and the Creative Quality of Stories of Fifth Grade Children," Elementary English 35 (April 1958):248-49; in Children's Writing: Research in Composition and Related Skills, ed. Alvina T. Burrows (Champaign, I961), p. 22. 101Edna DeHaven, "A Questioning Strategy Model for Creative Writing," Elementary English (September 1973): 959-61. 102Ibid., p. 959. 103Carol F. Laque and Phyllis A. Sherwood, A iaboratory Approach to Writing (Champaign: NCTE, 1977). 76 l041bid., p. 6. losIbid., p. 5. 106Francis P. Hunkins, Questioning Strategies and Techniqmes (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.,il972), p. 29. 1°7Ibid., p. 66. 108Ibid., p. 78. 109Jacob Getzel and Phillip Jackson, Creativity and Intelligence (New York: Wiley, 1962); in Smith et al., Language and Thinking in School, p. 129. ll°Ibid., 111 p. 129. Smith et al., ianguage and Thinking in School, 112Ibid. 113Lawrence F. Lowery, "Learning about Instruction: Questioning Strategies," A Handbook to Accompany a Personal Workshop (Berkeley: University of Califorfiia,’l974); in Thomas Hawkins, Group Inquiry Techniques for Teaching Writing (Champaign: NCTE, 1976), P. 39. 114Anthony V. Manzo, "Improving Reading Comprehen- sion Through Reciprocal Questioning," Syracuse University, Dissertation Abstracts International 30 (1970):5344-A. 115Jimmy S. Vance, "The Influence of a Teacher Questioning Strategy on Attitude and Critical Thinking," Arizona State University, Qissertation Abstracts Inter- national 33 (1972):669-A. 116Robert A. Lucking, "A Study of the Effects of a Hierarchically-Ordered Questioning Technique on Adoles- cents' Responses to Short Stories," University of Nebraska, 1975, Dissertation Abstracts International 36 (1976): 5185-A. 77 117Nolie B. Mayo, "The Effects of Discussion and Assignment Questions on the Quality of Descriptive Writing of Tenth Grade Students," Memphis State University, 1975, Dissertation Abstracts International 36 (1976): 7839-A. 118Lundsteen, H§1p_for the Teacher of Written Composition, p. 52. 119lbid., p. 58. 120Kellogg Hunt, Grammatical Structures Written at Three Grade Levels (Urbana, III1n01s: NCTE, I965). 121Lundsteen, Help for the Teacher of Written Composition, p. 55. 122R. L. Hillerich, "Evaluating Process and Product in Children's Writing," paper presented at the annual meeting of NCTE, Philadelphia, 1973; in Lundsteen, Help for the Teacher of Written Composition, p. 56. 123Graves, "Children's Writing: Research Directions and Hypotheses Based on Writing Processes of Seven-Year- Old Children." 124Emig, "Research on Writing." 125C. L. Barnhart, ed-r The American College Dictionary (New York: Random House, 1963), p. 509. 126John C. Mellon, Nationai Assessment and the Teaching of English (Champaign: NCTE, 1975), p.424. 1271bid., p. 23. 128Paul- B. Diederich, Measuring Growth in English (Champaign: NCTE, 1974). PP. 1-4. 129Charles R. Cooper and Lee Odell, Evaluating _ Writing: Describing, Measuring, Judging (Champaign: NCTE, 1977)! PP- 3’4. l3°Ibid., p. 4. 78 13lIbid., p. 9. 1321bid., p. ll. l331bid. 134Ibid., p. 12. 1351bid. l361bid. CHAPTER III DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY This chapter contains a detailed explanation of the design of the study, including the following: tested and related research The experimental design, the design validity, and Background to the study, including the making of the motion picture and the preliminary tests on the use of the film in the elementary classroom. population from which the of the experimental groups. student writing evaluation of the Study this study is to answer the l. The purposes of the study. 2. The hypotheses to be questions. 3. the statistical measure. 4. 5. A description of the sample was drawn and 6. A description of the procedure. Purposes The basic purpose of question: Is there a difference between two methods of using a motion picture: a Spaced presentation versus a Massed presentation? 79 80 The researcher created a silent motion picture designed to incorporate two questioning strategies. The questioning in film version A, the Spaced presentation, occurs as the film story develops (i.e., the projector is stopped at designated points in order to ask questions). The questioning in film version B, the Massed presentation, occurs after the viewing. The film story is open-ended: the action builds to a climax and then stops (i.e., the film has no conclusion). This characteristic offers the researcher another device for continued questioning. The film is designed to be used at the elementary school level as a stimulus for children's written expression; after viewing the film and experiencing the questioning strategies students supply an original ending to the story by writing. It is hypothe- sized that the questioning strategies within version A, the Spaced viewing presentation, will foster better writing than the use of the same questions at the end of version B, the Massed viewing presentation. Hypotheses The main question of the study concerns the effec- tiveness of a questioning strategy integrated into a motion picture presentation as stimulus for creative writing for children. The intervening variable is the quality of the writing that follows the film/questioning presentation; the measure of the quality of the writing 81 will give a group mean. This group mean will be compared to a second group mean, one obtained from the writings following a film presentation that includes questioning strategies after the film. The quality of the writings, as reflected in group means, will be determined by a holistic evaluation instrument. The basic research ques- tion can be stated in null form as follows: Ho: There is no difference between mean scores on the holistic measure of writing following the Spaced presentation and the mean scores on the holistic measure of writing following the Massed presentation. H1: There is a difference between mean scores on the holistic measure of writing following the Spaced presentation and the mean scores on the holistic measure of writing following the Massed presentation. The hypothesis can also be expressed as: Ho: E(X) = E(Y) H : E(X) f E(Y) 1 In addition to the major hypothesis stated above, seven research questions will be asked related to differ- ences by sex: 1. Is there a difference in the holistic scores of males versus females? Stated in null hypothesis form: H : There is no difference between the holistic 0 scores of male subjects and female subjects There is a difference between the holistic scores of male subjects and female subjects I-' O. 82 Is there a difference in the holistic scores of the Massed presentation: males versus females? Stated in null hypothesis form: H : There is no difference between the holistic 0 scores of male subjects and female subjects in the Massed presentation H1: There is a difference between the holistic scores of male subjects and female subjects in the Massed presentation Is there a difference in the holistic scores of the Spaced presentation: males versus females? Stated in null hypothesis form: Ho: There is no difference between the holistic scores of male subjects and female subjects in the Spaced presentation H1: There is a difference between the holistic scores of male subjects and female subjects in the Spaced presentation 18 there a difference in the top quartile holistic scores between males and females in the Massed presentation? Stated in null hypothesis form: H : There is no difference between the top 0 quartile holistic scores of male subjects and female subjects in the Massed presentation There is a difference between the top quartile holistic scores of male subjects and female subjects in the Massed presentation Is there a difference in the top quartile holistic scores between males and females in the Spaced presentation? Stated in null hypothesis form: 83 H : There is no difference between the top quartile holistic scores of male subjects and female subjects in the Spaced presentation There is a difference between the top quartile holistic scores of male subjects and female subjects in the Spaced presentation 6. Is there a difference in the bottom quartile holistic scores between males and females in the Massed presentation? Stated in null hypothesis form: H : There is no difference between the bottom quartile holistic scores of male subjects and female subjects in the Massed presentation H1: There is a difference between the bottom quartile holistic scores of male subjects and female subjects in the Massed presentation 7. Is there a difference in the bottom quartile holistic scores between males and females in the Spaced presentation? Stated in null hypothesis form: H : There is no difference between the bottom 0 quartile holistic scores of male subjects and female subjects in the Spaced presentation H1: There is a difference between the bottom quartile holistic scores of male subjects and female subjects in the Spaced presentation Lastly, the relationship between writing perfor- mance and reading achievement will be investigated by asking the following three questions: 84 Is there a correlation Educational Assessment the holistic scores? Is there a correlation Educational Assessment the holistic scores of presentation? 18 there a correlation Educational Assessment the holistic scores of between the Michigan Program reading scores between the Michigan Program reading scores students in the Spaced between the Michigan Program reading scores students in the Massed and and and presentation? The Experimental Design Randomization is used to eliminate initial bias between the two groups1 (i.e., between those exposed to film version A, the Spaced presentation, and film version B, the Massed presentation). Isaac and Michael explain that . . . randomization techniques permit him to declare that at the time of assignment the groups were equal. The probability theory tells him to what extent the randomly assigned subjects in the two groups might have been expected to differ by chance on T1 and the test of significance takes account of such chance difference.2 The assignment of the eight classrooms to the Massed presentation and the Spaced presentation was by randomiza- tion; a flip of a coin determined which classrooms would witness either film version A or film version B. Control was established by using the Massed presen- tation as a frame of reference for the Spaced presentation; that is, film version B, the Massed presentation, was used 85 as the control, and film version A, the Spaced presenta- tion, was the treatment. Because this experimental design does not incorporate a pretest, it follows the Randomized Control-Group Posttest Only design model. According to Isaac and Michael, After the subjects are assigned at random to groups, the experimental group is exposed to X, such as a film with a racial prejudice theme, and the control group is not. During or after the exposure to X, the two groups are tested for the first time. Their scores are compared to ascertain the effect of X, and an appropriate test of significance is applied to determine whether the difference is greater than might have occurred by chance.3 In this experiment, the treatment group is exposed to the film with questioning strategies interspersed within the viewing (the Spaced presentation), and the control group is exposed to the film with questioning strategies at the end of the viewing (the Massed presentation). A graphic illustration of the experimental design is offered by Isaac and Michael on Table 3.1.4 Table 3.l.--The Experimental Design. Pretest Treatment Posttest Experimental Group (R)* X T2 Control Group (R) T2 *Random assignment 86 Design Validity The two groups are assumed to be equivalent on the basis of random selection. According to Isaac and Michael, the design . . . controls for, but does not measure the effects of history, maturation, and pretesting. It is par- ticularly useful when pretests are unavailable, inconvenient, or too costly; when subjects' anonymity mugt be kept; and when a pretest may interact with X. In this case, a pretest would interact with the treatment, because only this particular film would be valid as a pretest. The film was designed specifically as the stimulus to creative writing. A different stimulus would not be a valid measure in terms of the study's design. ine Statistical Measure The experimental data obtained from the holistic evaluation of the two sets of papers (i.e., the scores of the papers) will be rank ordered for analysis. The statistic designed to examine this type of non-parametric data is the Mann-Whitney test for two independent samples, a test that, according to Hays, is . . . one of the best of the non-parametric tech- niques with respect to power and power efficiency . . . an extremely useful device for the comparison of two independent groups.6 The Mann-Whitney test for two independent samples uses the following formula: 87 G X (bi-ti) 2 = NlNz _ i=1 00 12 N1 + N2 + 1 (N1 + N2)(N1 + N2 - 1) Background to the Study As part of the requirements for a graduate course, the researcher conducted a study titled "A Study of Dolls Advertised, Sold, and Used in the Lansing (MI.) Area: Fall, 1975." The results of the study (Appendix,A) showed the most p0pular doll for girls was the Barbie; boys pre- ferred G.I. Joe, the Star Trek Cast, the Super Heroes (Batman, Captain Marvel, and Tarzan), the Lone Ranger and Tonto, and the Bionic Man. In the winter of 1976 the researcher created a motion picture as partial fulfillment of the requirements of a course in cinematography through the Department of Telecommunications at Michigan State University. For seven years prior to making the film,the researcher had been using instructional media at the elementary classroom level: in private and public schools, in the South, East, and Midwest of the United States, with self-contained and open classrooms, with normal children and those considered emotionally disturbed, and with children whose native language was not English. In each of these varied educational environments the researcher made use of varying instructional media: film, videotape, television, photography, and graphics; and sought methods for making 88 media presentations more significant in classroom instruc- tion. Stauffer's Directed Reading Thinking Activity (D.R.T.A.)7 offered a methodology that could be adapted to educational technology, specifically, the design of a film that could be stopped at given points for teacher- student interaction. D.R.T.A. provided a rationale for the motion picture that was developed for the Telecommuni- cations class in the winter of 1976. Filming Techniques The experimental film was also designed to inte- grate the results of the doll study conducted the previous school term, namely, the toy figures that had been found to be of high interest. Those chosen as film characters would have, therefore, a high stimulus value for elementary school children: 1. The Super Heroes, including Tarzan, Batman, and Captain Marvel. 2. Mr. Spock from Star Trek. 3. A Barbie doll. Another character was added to this cast: a villanous, gorilla-type, hairy doll, two feet tall (three times larger than the other characters). These players, there- fore, would be well-known to the student audience; they would act out their filmic performance as if they had life-like properties through the technique of animation. 89 A 16mm Bolex reflex camera was used to film the dolls, which were secured on a desk top with masking tape. A single-frame exposure technique was used with the Bolex: the shutter was released twice and two frames were made of the given scene. The tape was then removed from the doll's feet; the doll was moved a fraction of an inch, and secured again in its new position. Another two frames were exposed, and the movement was repeated until all the shots of all the sequences in the five scenes were complete. This single-frame exposure technique created a film that offers a projected image with motion; the dolls now seem to have locomotive properties. Two features were included in the film that would facilitate its use in the experimen- tal classrooms: (l) the length was kept to approximately three minutes; and, (2) the film had no sound track. The Plot The screen story follows a heroine-villain-hero model. The following synopsis describes the action: Scene 1.. Fade-in. The opening shot of this first scene fades in to Barbie as she is seen walking from screen left to screen right. The camera then cuts to a close-up of the gorilla's face; his eyes are seen "rolling around in his head." The scene ends by fading out on this close-up of the villain. (Fade-out). Scene 2. Fade-in. The first shot in this scene is a continuation of the fade-out shot in the previous 90 scene: the gorilla's face is seen close-up with his eyes rolling around. Suddenly, the eyes st0p moving and become fixed, directed to the bottom left portion of the screen. Barbie is again seen walking from left to right; she abruptly stops and looks up. The gorilla's face appears again; the eyes look directly at the camera and begin advancing rapidly toward it . . . and the next shot shows Barbie cradled in the gorilla's left arm. The camera cuts to a close-up of the animal's face; his eyes roll around. Suddenly his eyes stop moving and become fixed, directed to the tOp left of the screen; the scene fades-out on this image. (Fade-out). Scene 3. Fade-in. The image that appears is the same shot that faded-out in the previous scene: the gorilla's eyes fixed toward the top-left corner of the screen. The next shot shows a close-up of Tarzan swinging down on a rope from left to right; he lands and looks up at the gorilla, and the beast looks down at him. Barbie's face is seen close-up, also looking down upon Tarzan. Tarzan turns his upward stare from the gorilla to Barbie, and as he looks at Barbie he suddenly turns his head and looks toward the top left portion of the screen; the scene fades-out on this image. (Fade-out). Scene 4. Fade-in. Tarzan is seen again looking up to the top left of the screen; the gorilla and Barbie are also looking in the same direction. The camera cuts to a close-up of Batman as he swings down on a rope from 91 screen left to right; he lands and looks up at the gorilla; then exchanges glances with Tarzan. The gorilla and Barbie look down upon Batman and Tarzan. Suddenly, Tarzan looks up to screen top left; then Batman looks up to screen top left; and, a close-up of the gorilla's face shows his eyes moving to screen t0p left. The scene fades out. (Fade- out). Scene 5. Fade-in. This scene fades-in to the same image that faded-out in the previous scene: the gorilla's eyes fixed, directed toward the top-left portion of the screen. Tarzan is seen looking up in the same direction; Batman is also looking up. Suddenly, from the left side of the screen a close-up shot shows Captain Marvel flying in from left to right; he lands, looks up at the gorilla, and exchanges glances with Batman and Tarzan. The three Super Heroes seem to be having a dialogue of some sort. The gorilla and Barbie are shown looking down upon the Super Heroes. The gorilla's eyes abruptly move toward screen top left; Tarzan, Batman, and Captain Marvel turn and look up also. All the characters look up for several seconds . . . but no one seems to be coming. Suddenly, Mr. Spock "materializes out of thin air” in the midst of the Super Heroes. The Heroes look at Spock and then at each other. Spock looks up at Barbie and the gorilla, and then at the Super Heroes; the gorilla and Barbie look down at all the characters below. Spock suddenly starts moving from left to right; the Super 92 Heroes begin moving, some right to left, others left to right. And then, a free-for-all ensues among the would be rescuers. The gorilla's eyes are seen darting back and forth at the fight below him, when he suddenly looks up to screen left and the film cuts to black. (Cut to black: FILM ENDS)* There are two versions of the film story described above: film version A (Spaced presentation) and film version B (Massed presentation). These two films differ only in one aspect: the length of the fade-outs in film version A is extended (it lasts eight seconds, as opposed to the two-second fades of film version B). The extended fade is used to stop the projector while maintaining the film continuity. When the projector is stopped, the researcher proceeds with the questioning strategies. In film version B (Massed presentation), the questioning occurs after the viewing; the film is not interrupted.“ Questioning Strategies The questioning that occurred within film version A and after film version B was designed to fit the developing action on the screen. Five questions were used (question number four has two parts): *A graphic representation of the synopsis is shown in Appendix B. Figure 3.1 depicts the structure of the film. 93 .Am can my mconHm> Edam 039 m0 coaumuumDHHH owsmmuw .H.m owsmfim QZHBHmZ mom mZOHBUDmBmZH UZHZOHBmMDO mom QmmmOBm mH NOBUMHQmm .mowm mv mZHlmndh Qz¢ mBDOIfindh \ \ \ 1. o n \ \ i , i one: mo m .mowm mm \ .momm w moon «N .momn mm Known v." xx UZH3QH> \\\ omodom \\\ .\\\ mzHa aseoe, m mzmom \“v s mzmo m mzmom .\u m mzmom -.\\ mzmom moum oouoo ozm A mcflzofi, noumsuumucw szmm ozHeHmz 14 onmmm> sumac oneaezmmmmo omommm mom mZOHBUDMBmZH mem mmHUmfidem DZHZOHBmmDO \\\\MWWmm NV mZHlmQ¢m 92¢ mBDOIMQflh \\ .GHE mvum . . . - . [w oszmH> mood mo moom em uomu em uoou mm uuom u XX Dmmmfiz MZHB AfiBOB VIWZMUm m mszmi\-N mzmum- . MZmUm mvum oouoo sz IA mcw3wfl> msoscflucoo zHUmm 1m onmmm> Shame onewmssu u o “coco mamum mcwuflhztt ammo owusuonuum IATI 'l m e m N H umzoaaom mm @6000 we musuoswum Eooummmao one; esmdhum ox: o o\z o o o z o mosses: tousuuswum N\H m «*4 m w N\H m N N N\H N Eooumnmao .xB mom .xz pom .xs Hod .xs Hod .M3 Hon .OE Hum .MB pom .xz mom mufl>fluo¢ .Hn N\H a .mp5 m .Hn H .sHE mv .u: H .8NE om .un N\H H .cwE mv mcfluww3 anaconda n Ha ca a v ma oa om mummy * .x3\a .x3\a .x3\N .x3\a .x3\H .x3\m .OE\m .x3\H on: Edam m h o m v m N H HOQEUZ EOOHmmmHU .muasmom muflmccoflummso Honommall.m.m OHQMB 108 because the child was absent from school on the day the examination was given, or the child had not been enrolled in a Michigan public school. It was decided to include in the experimental study only those subjects for whom reading scores on the M.E.A.P. were available: first, there is a positive correlation between reading and writing (Hunt,23 Smith,24 Heyszsl); second, by having reading scores on all subjects the statis- tical design would be strengthened. Since the fourteen sub- jects without M.E.A.P. reading scores were evenly distribu- ted among the eight classrooms, it was deemed worthwhile to suffer a mortality rate of fourteen and exclude these students from the analysis of the data. Table 3.6 portrays which classrooms lost subjects from the above design. Table 3.6.--Experimental Subjects Lost. Room Student Room Number Loss Number Treatment 1 0 0 5 Control (Spaced 2 1 1 6 (Massed presentation) .‘ presentation) 3 l 5 7 4 4 2 8 Total Student Loss 6 8 Total Student Loss In addition, the loss of fourteen subjects would not adversely affect the total N, which remains at a strong level: 171. 109 It was decided to compare the student writings by sex. Studies show that girls tend to write higher quality papers than boys (Ewing,26 Tabachnick and May,27 and Freden28 ). But the most powerful evidence on the superi- ority of girls' writing ability is given by the National Assessment of Educational Progress, a project designed to periodically survey the educational achievement of nine- year-olds, thirteen-year-olds, seventeen-year-olds, and adults (ages 26-35). The 1976 National Assessment Report gave the following results: At age 9, 14% of the female papers were compe- tent, compared to 6% for the males; at age 13, 37% of the female papers were competent compared to 21% of the male papers; and at age 17, 54% of the female papers were competent, compared to 35% of the male papers. The basic characteristics of all the experimental subjects in this study are shown on Table 3.7. Student writing Evaluation Procedure There were 171 student pieces to be rated. These were given to the two raters; they followed the same scoring guidelines as for the pilot study. Three initial categories were established: low quality mdddle quality high quality 42 papers 87 papers 42 papers Each of these categories was subdivided into nine score groups (zero-to-eight). Table 3.8 shows the subdivision. 110 Table 3.7.--Experimental Subjects: Treatment, Grade Level, and Sex. Room N ler Grade Males Females Total Film Version A l 4 7 14 21 Spaced VleW1ng 2 4 11 12 23 (Treatment) 3 5 11 9 20 4 5 12 5 17 41 40 81 81 Film Version B 5 4 10 12 22 Massed Viewing 6 4 12 12 24 (Control) 7 5 l4 7 21 8 5 13 10 23 49 41 90 90 TOTAL N 171 111 Table 3.8.--Scoring Distribution of Experimental Papers. Number of Score Papers 21 Low quality Total low quality: 42 21 16 16 Middle quality 23 Total middle quality: 87 16 16 21 High quality Total high quality: 42 mummastI—ao 21 The two sets of ratings for these 171 experimental papers were analyzed by the Spearman Rank Correlation Coeffi- 30 cient. The inter-rater reliability for the two raters was found to be .80. This reliability coefficient is within the boundaries set forth by Diederich.31 Upon close scrutiny of the ratings of the papers shown in Table 3.8, however, it was feared that this level of evaluation was too "gross” a measure to be functional. Specifically, the objective for giving a zero-to-eight rating to the total group of papers was to establish a rank order from which a statistical analysis would deter- mine if the Spaced presentation (treatment) resulted in higher quality writing than the Massed presentation (control). The statistic to be used was the Mann-Whitney 112 test for two independent samples.32 The Mann-Whitney test is designed so that it can incorporate tie scores, but it was determined that the great number of ties resulting from the zero-to-eight scoring would not be amenable to the Mann-Whitney design. It was decided, therefore, that a test for rank differences be conducted using a simpler 33 test: the chi-square for parallel samples. The statistic chosen was the Chi-Square Test for differences in proba- bilities.34 . 1 i Ala-pr Setting the alpha level at .05, with 16 degrees 02 n2 __1.i-__1. T Cj N of freedom, the value of T needed to reject the null hypothesis and establish the fact that there is a difference between the mean scores of the student papers was 26.30. The value obtained by using the statistic above was T = 18.45, a figure below the required level. It was then determined that a refinement of the initial procedure would be useful. This second evaluation would not alter the data in any way.35 The two sets of papers were returned, therefore, to the raters in nine packets. Each packet contained a complete scoring category. For example, the packet labeled ”zero--rater 1“ contained the sixteen papers that rater 1 had evaluated as ”zero." The 113 packet labeled "four--rater 2" contained the twenty-three papers that had been given a score of four by rater 2, etc. The raters were asked to work on one packet at a time, beginning with the zero packet. Each rater was to rank the papers within each packet, without regard for the contents of the other packets. For example, within packet 3 there were sixteen papers. The raters ranked these sixteen papers in ascending order of writing quality. The lowest quality paper in packet 3 would therefore receive a ranking of zero; the next paper in ascending order of quality would receive a one; the next paper a two; and so on, all the way up to the last paper in packet 3, the sixteenth paper, which would receive a ranking of fifteen. The graphic illustration shown in Figure 3.2 depicts how Rater 1 ranked the papers within packet 3. When the raters had completed these ”within- packet” rankings, the packets were returned to the researcher who performed the following task. The packets from rater 1 were rank-ordered in decreasing value, from packet 8 to packet 0. The papers were then withdrawn from their packet and all papers were rank-ordered from 171 (the highest quality paper) down to one (the lowest quality paper). When the 171 papers from rater l were ranked by the researcher, he proceeded to rank the 171 papers from rater 2 in the same manner. Figure 3.3 114 .m umxomm 8H mummmm mo H Hmumm an mstcmm .N.m wusmHm mCchmm o H N m e m o h m m CH HH NH mH VH mH m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m mmuoom H Hmumm Mama an pmumpuo muommm muH nuHB m uoxomm m porous mmm8¢m HEB Mm QmZmOmmmm 115 .H Houmm eoum whoops HH< mo uncommomom an mstcmm .m.m musmHm H I N .... ONIHN ... meMH HOSOHMOmOm ... OMHIHMH .. mleomH HmHINmH .. OhHthH ... mHI ON 6.. MMCMH H Hmpmm go. I go. QHI ON IH oo- mHION flog .._.I.oHU.. D D. Imuomwwowwm no I. D HE. .D D Do D2 D D H Houmm H Hmumm H Hmumm AOHON ou uanmv o uoxomm nAllIl muwxomm HHd ...Vu h umxomm m umxomm ”mmcchmu map mo coHumuumsHHH UHBQMHU mmm0mun UH M 0 all 2 .373 3+) 0 u H HQ 00 '0 'U "58.; 10>: an: at!) 3:33 com 0 H 60 cu 8%; II! THE -— —— Boys using Boy TV Dolls (G.I. Joe, Star Trek, Super Heroes, Bionic Man) Girls using Teen TV Dolls (Barbie) The graph shown above illustrates the incidence of use, by age, of the two most popular types of dolls, as determined by the 1975 study. Next to the Teen TV Doll, the favorite doll among girls was the traditional Baby Doll; boys overwhelmingly chose the Boy TV Dolls. The incidence of use for all the dolls investigated in the study is shown below. Type of Doll Incidence of Use Incidence of Use Among Girls Among Girls Teen TV 51% 3% Girl TV 20% 0% Baby Doll 26% 6% Boy TV 3% 91% 100% 100% .165 APPENDIX B SYNOPSIS BDOIWQflh :.Umwn mHS Gd GGSOHM ...........unmflu HHOM: wwhm man “muwfimu onu ocflomw common on puma common Scum mcfixamz pom molwmoHo comm ma caaflnom one comm ma Haov wflnumm use "zHImowm mEHu mcficcsu one .cmwuom mnu so umommm >mzu noes: :fi Hooho wnu cw :3onm mum >059 .mfi>oE won :H mcoom comm Eouw mmfimuw pmuomamm Mo mucmfimmumaco mum BoHon mammumouonm one 166 167 Boolmomm .uomfluumou cwwuom USXLH US$002 mo>3 n.5HaLrom 3:9 .....:@:3 mcflammouum coon we 02m \_3 .OH Hmm OSQ L3 nxUHQ-oo..u . ..... Uco >Lxumzw roo:o>pn a: .ume cmwuom cumsou waHM mfiouwn .QNOOHL: >Hsoppom nvxo we: 6:6 noocuo-AHHOH w0>w mflSv mDoH>mum on» no COMUHmom CH comm me MHHHuom one uselwwmw meow mnu ”ZHlmodh NNHOO N mzmow 168 .cmuums no :306 xooH mflnumm can maafiuom one .uwwm m.MHHHHom map An mosma pom czoo mmcflzm om ........o:m couuoe um :3oo mxooa mHHHHom use .unmflu Imou common EOMN mummmmm couume .mHHauom mnu um an AA ~11... mXOOH CMNHMH. .uooloomw m50H>wum on» cw mm :oHuHmom wEMm any comm mi mHHfluom one "zHumomm .. i m. co m mzmom 169 BDOIMQdm .mou m: muow cm mono» cmwume hauao “1 .3: nxOOH Aacoflpsm aqafism 07H ogNNma pm ”XOOH owl—1m WHQHQQ 0:1“ u n n n o ,v. 170 .:3OU mm:a3w U:d.... mJCOH 21:73.; . . . . .CM—bumm UM WXOOH :MvNHfi/H. .uooumomN moofl>mum may cw mm coauwmom mEMm .......u:mflulmou :mmumm Eouw mzu :H :mmm ma cmnume ”ZHImadm 7:_E:o mzlomoau mammllm :sEDom .....mCHxOOa onam mfl maaauoq moB ... h J . mmio. v mzmom 171 .mmoum: ms» um czop mxooH mflnumm maflnz umnuo .....m mxowa mW:m comm um mcflxooH mum mmoumc mos . \ . 0‘ o A ‘7 ‘1}!!! 172 .CH mmflam m: .molmmoHo mummmmm Hm>nmz :«mummo .mHHHuom mcu um m: mxoofiww.w. ....ocm .mocmH :3.‘1 V . v .11»: . .unmflunmou :mmnom ou mcwxooH mcflxooH mfl cmuume HHHum mfi waafiuom are "zHumoam :.y.~...,.:.z.z.l.-;..--r,(.bmuao m mzmom 173 m: mxooH pom mcusu cmuume .....Hwnuo nomm um x00a mmOum: mmuou mze .usmflulmou :mmuom pum3ou m>OE mmAm m m Hauom mnu Aacmppom . m>umz :flmummo um mxooH :muuoe .mmoumn mzu on :306 .Hm>umz camummo um mxooH :mEumm 174 .xoomm um £306 mxooH MHHHHom mga .MHmEmo mnu um mxooH xoomm .uz a .mcmom ms» :0 mummmmm xoomm .Hz .....mdcmooom cm£3 m3 mCAxooH ma mcoth>m .md mxooH cam mans» GMEumm \ .m: mxooH pom mcuou Hm>umz :«muflmo 175 ......unmau ou puma Scum m>OE ou mcammn pom Ehm mH: mmmflmu xoomm . . . . ..UMMVS mung MENU“ CMNHMH. ‘1... -c- x . 1;! - , , 3! II! .mmoumm Hmmom mnu um mxooH xoomm .HE .xoomw .uz um xooH mmoumm ammom mom Ham .xoomm .uz um mxooH :mEumm .cmaumm meMDDM xoomm 177 .m sz ZAHm MUdAm OB BDU ..... Aaqmooom cmxz mmHmE m u um £306 mxooH MHHHuom mza 1.317 .momHm mmxmu unmflw uso-HHm :< D APPENDIX C INSTRUCTIONS TO STUDENTS AND QUESTIONING STRATEGIES INSTRUCTIONS TO STUDENTS AND QUESTIONING STRATEGY FILM VERSION A--SPACED PRESENTATION After the projector has been threaded and the researcher introduced to the class, the researcher addresses the students: I am going to show you a silent motion picture today. There is no end to this film yet. I'll be stopping the projector four times to ask you questions about what you see on the screen. I don't want an answer to the questions--keep the answers to yourself. Just think care- fully about the questions. The researcher then follows the procedure below: (turn on projector) The Film Begins FADE-IN SCENE 1 [; FADE-OUT SCENE 1 (stop projector) Question 1: Who are the main characters in this movie? (After a two-second pause, the question is repeated.) Who are the main characters in this movie? (turn on projector) L; FADE-IN SCENE 2 FADE-OUT SCENE 2 (stop projector) 178 179 Question 2: What's a good title for this film? (two-second pause) What's a good title for this film? (turn on projector) FADE-IN SCENE 3 F LyFADE-OU‘I‘ SCENE 3 (stop projector) Question 3: What is happening in this movie? (two-second pause) What is happening in this movie? (turn on projector) FADE-IN SCENE 4 I:>FADE-OUT SCENE 4 (st0p projector) Question 4: What other characters do you think might be coming? (two-second pause) What other characters do you think might be coming? (three-second pause) Can you think of two words that describe the action in this film? (two-second pause) Can you think of two words that describe the action in this film? (turn on projector) FADE-IN SCENE 5 [;.CUT TO BLACK/END SCENE 5 The Film Ends (stop projector) Question 5: What do you think is going to happen next? (two-second pause) What do you think is gong to happen next? (five-second pause) 180 How many of you have played with these toy figures in the past? Raise your hand if you have. (the researcher records the number that used the toy figures, and then pro- ceeds with the instructions for writing). This film has no end yet; we are trying to get ideas from different students on how it should end. Would you please think of an interesting ending to this movie and write it on this sheet of paper? Don't tell anyone how it ends . . . keep it a secret. I'll type all the interesting endings and give you a copy. Please stay in your seats after you finish the story. At this point the pencils and paper are passed out and the children begin to write. 181 INSTRUCTIONS TO STUDENTS AND QUESTIONING STRATEGY FILM VERSION §--MASSED PRESENTATION After the projector has been threaded and the researcher introduced to the class, the researcher addresses the students: I am going to show you a silent motion picture today. There is no end to this film yet. I'll be asking you some questions after you see it. I don't want an answer to the questions--keep the answers to yourself. Just think carefully about the questions. The researcher then follows the procedure below: (turn on projector) The Film Begins L; FADE-IN SCENE l CUT TO BLACK/END SCENE 5 The Film Ends (stOp projector) The researcher then addresses the class and asks the questions below in the order in which they appear: Question 1: Who are the main characters in this movie? (two-second pause) Who are the main characters in this movie? (three-second pause) Question 2: What's a good title for this film? (two-second pause) What's a good title for this film? (three-second pause) 182 Question 3: What is happening in this movie? (two-second pause) What is happening in this movie? (three-second pause) Question 4: What other characters do you think might be coming? (two-second pause) What other characters do you think might be coming? (three-second pause) Can you think of two words that describe the action in this film? (two-second pause) Can you think of two words that describe the action in this film? (three-second pause) Question 5: What do you think is going to happen next? (two-second pause) What do you think is going to happen next? (five-second pause) How many of you have played with these toy figures in the past? Raise your hand if you have. (the researcher records the number that used the toy figures, and then pro- ceeds with the instructions for writing). This film has no end yet; we are trying to get ideas from different students on how it should end. Would you please think of an interesting ending to this movie and write it on this sheet of paper? Don't tell anyone how it ends . . . keep it a secret. I'll type all the interesting endings and give you a copy. Please stay in your seats after you finish the story. At this point the pencils and paper are passed out and the children begin to write. APPENDIX D TEACHER AND PRINCIPAL QUESTIONNAIRE TEACHER QUESTIONNAIRE Have any students enrolled (or been transferred to) your Language Arts classroom since the beginning of the school year? Would you identify them, please? How long have they been in your classroom? Have you been the regular Language Arts teacher since the beginning of the year? Do your students shift from room to room during the day, or do they remain in one room? How often do your students view motion pictures in their classroom? Do you incorporate films in the teaching of the Language Arts? Do children make motion pictures? Do you have a subject known as "Language Arts"? Is there a room known as the "Language Arts Classroom"? Is there a time of day reserved for the teaching of Language Arts? How often during the week? Do you use a textbook in Language Arts class? What is the name of the text? Do you have a textbook used for Writing? Do you use other materials for Language Arts? Is there a scheduled time when children are taught Writing? What might be an average amount of time that they write? What kinds of experiences do you include in your writing lessons? (Penmanship, Creative Writing, Outlining, Letters) How do you evaluate your students' writing performance? For the children's own work and awareness on a day-to day basis: numerical grades (85-90-95-100) letter grades (A-B-C) written evaluation describing achievement For grade reports (report cards to parents, student records) 183 lo. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 184 How would you describe your school: one that is Structured, or one that is Open? Your classroom: Structured or Open? Structured Open 1 2 3 4 5 Is it possible for parents to withdraw their children from your school and enroll them in another school in the district? Do you have any students like these? How long have you been an elementary school teacher? In what ways were you prepared in college to teach Writing? In graduate education classes? Did your class participate in any Great Books program this year? Last? Will you this year? How will you prepare for this activity? When your students have a Writing activity, do they use Pen, Pencil? Do they have a choice? Do they use Cursive or Manuscript writing? Do they have a choice? (The study will permit them to use either) What paper do they use? Color? Width of lines? In relation to other years you've taught, how would you rate this class to others in relation to Writing ability? Below Average Average Above Average How are students placed in your classroom? By parent/ student choice, administrative decision, sex, race, ability? How would you rate your class in relation to the other 4th/5th grade(s) in your school in relation to: (1) general ability; (2) writing ability? Have you participated this year in the Focus program that utilizes open-ended films for affective educa- tion? How often? Do the students write after viewing the films? 185 PRINCIPAL QUESTIONNAIRE How are the students placed in a given classroom? How were the children in the experimental classrooms placed? STUDENT/PARENT CHOICE? SEX? RACE? a. b. c. d. e. f. ABILITY (IQ)? ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION? OTHER? a. b. C. d. e. f. How does your school boundary compare with others in your district in relation to the type of student that attends your school? SOCIOECONOMIC LEVEL CHILDREN OF PROFESSIONALS CHILDREN OF BLUE-COLLAR WORKERS MIDDLE CLASS CHILDREN LOW-INCOME CHILDREN UPPERPCLASS Could I get birth dates of students in experiment? Test scores? APPENDIX E SAMPLE OF WRITING PAPER 186 Your Name: Date: APPENDIX F STUDENT WRITING SAMPLES: (1) HIGH QUALITY, (2) MIDDLE QUALITY, (3) LOW QUALITY 187 188 A3 189 Amy APPENDIX G REPRESENTATION OF STUDENT PAPER RANKINGS .Dcmfiummua pmmmmz m5mum> DamEDmmnB omommm "mcflxcmu comm cw mmHmEMm 03» may cmmzumn mocmummmao m ma mums» ma mcHEumumo OD ommo ma mmHmEMm Dcmocmmmocw o3u Hem umma mmcuflc3lccmz mas 190 ommmmz Hoo mmaloalm H ommmmz Hoo mmanoalm ommmmz moo moHIHHIm o ommmmz moo moalaaum ommmmz moo omolooIH ommmmz moo omolooIH omommm woo Hmauvaum vacuum woo Hoauaanm . _ . Rum . _ _ n.l . _ _ e.L . _ . 7.1 _ . . 1;; _ . _ «Au . . _ ,Aab . _ . . _ _ _ . . . omommm moH HHHINHIM u. omommm moa mnolmolu omommm mod mHoINoIO .m. ommmmz mma moalomno omommm ova bmanmauo u. ommmmz oha ooaloaln omommm HAH muoumo-o + nmommw and mmousoim usmfiummua mcflxsmm mooo Hmmmm ucmospm usmEummHB mcwxcmm mooo Hmmmm usmooum N umumm H Hmumm .AN Hmumm com a Hmummv mmcfixcmm Hmmmm Damosum mo cowumucmmmnmmm ommcmpcoo.!..HIU magma APPENDIX H TABULATION OF EXPERIMENTAL DATA ANALYSES s..— 191 .mmmmo Ham ca mo. um Dmm Hm>mH mnm~¢ “muoz 5.0m o.vm m. mcasmfi> ommmom..m> omommm Domflmm Domnmm mmoo. hmao. I. umcfluflu3 mo muommms owumwaon may H.vh h.o> m :0 mmuoom some cmmzumo mocmHmMMHa mm Hm mm Hm mm Hm mammnuomhm ADV mommz xcmm mammnuomhm can: Hasz mo msumum mesmoAMAamHm .mflmmnuomhm cams umflmhamsd mama HmucmeHmmxm mo cowumaonms.l..alm mance 192 m.o m.m M mmHmEmM .m> mmaom "coflu Domflmm Domflmm mm. ov. I. Imucmmmum vmommm mo mawuumov no» EH D02 D02 m.m o.h E mmnoom maumwaon cmmsumn mocmummmwa .m H.HH «.ma m. mmHMEum .m> mmamm_usowumu Domnmm Domnmm Ho. mo. I. Icmmmum ommmmz mo mawuumav mom :w #02 ~.ma o.ma E mmuoom uwumwaon cmm3umn mocmummmwo .v A o . 2 o .2 w. I «33%.. Dom.mm Domnmm mo. No. I. .m> memE “cowumucmmmum omomam cw uoz m.mm H.mm E mmuoom owumwaon smmSDmn mocmumHMAQ .m 93 ~12 w. I amamsmm Domnmm Domnmm mm. cm. I. .m> mmHmE «sofiumucmmmum pmmmmz :« Doz uoz o.mv o.v¢ E mmnoom owumwao: cmmsumn mocmummmwo .N 93 .33 w. I I Domnmm uomnmm mm. mo. I. mmHmEmm .m> mmHmE uoz uoz m.~o o.mh E “mmuoom owumfidon Emmaumn mocmumwmflo .H «m Hm mm Hm Nm Hm mammnuomam ADV mocmo momma x mcowummoo noncommm pmumamm Haaz mo usumum Iguaamflm cum .mcoflummoo noummmmm omumHmm ”manuamcd mama HmucmEHHmmxm mo EOADMH:AMB;I..~Im manna 193 .mmmmo Ham ca mo. um Dmm Hm>ma nomad "muoz m.mH H.va M mmHmEmm..m> mmamm “cowumucmmmum nomflmm pomnmm mm. Hm. omomam mo mafluumso souuon :H HA02 #02 l m.va H.HH E mmuoom oaumwaon cmmsumn mocmummmwn .n h.h m.oa M mmHmEmM_.m> mmadm "cowumucmmmnm Dommmm Dommmm hm. om. ommmmz mo mafluumso Eouuon ca “62 uoz I v.o v.m E mmuoom maumwaon cmm3umn mocmummmwa .o mm Hm mm Hm NM Hm mammnuommm ADV mocmo macaummoo noummmmm omDMHmm Haaz «0 msumum -Hmflamflm mommz xcmm .omscwucoo.!u.mIm mance 194 .mmmmo Ham cw mo. um Dmm Hm>mH mamad “muoz . . m Hmumm 6N0 HN Spa-H3 Om.¢.m.z coaumucmmmum ommmmz mnu cflnufl3 . . H Hmumm mmuoom mcfluwu3 mo cowumoam>m owumwaon mom moo Hm nufl3 .m.¢.m.2 mmuoum mmwommu .m.<.m.z cmm3umn comeHmHHou .m . . N Hmumm woo mm Sufi; Om.«.m.z newumusmmmum omommm mnu casuw3 . . a Hmumm mmuoom mcwuflns mo cowumnam>m owumflaoz 0cm Hoo om £DH3 .m.4.m.z mmuoom mcwommu .m.<.m.z cmm3umn cowumamuuou .N . . N Hmumm Hoo mm £“fl3 Om.¢.m.z . . a Hmumm mmuoom mcwuflu3 mo Gawumsam>m owumflaon com Hoo om :DH3 .m.<.m.2 mmuoom mcwommn .m.m.m.z cmmsumn coaumamnuou .H mosmofimwsmaw modumamuuou mmfiufiu3 0cm mcwmmmm cmmsumn sowumamuuoo 6:33: EB mcflommm cmm3umm coflumamuuoo "mammamcd mama HmucmEHHmmxm mo cowumaonm9.:..MIm mHnt BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Allen, W. H. "Instructional Media Research: Past, Present, and Future." A-V Communications Review 19 (1971): 5-18. Cited by C. F. Hoban, Tie State of the Art of Instructional Films, p. 20. Stanford:fERIC CIEathghouse on Media and Technology, September 1971. American Council on Education Studies. The Motion Picture in Education. Washington, D.C.: Amefican CounciI onIEducation. . A School Uses a Motion Picture. Washing- ton, D.C.: American COuncil on Education, 1940. Andrews, Charles R. "The Effect of Short-Term Interrup- . tions Upon Factual Acquisition from Motion Picture Films Among Intermediate Elementary School Pupils." The University of Oklahoma, 1972. Cited by ArV Communications Review 20 (Washing! ton, D.C.: AECT, FaII I972):348. Angel, Barbara. Educational Representative, National Film Board of Canada, Prairie Region, Winnipeg, Mani- toba. Telephone conversation,‘Wednesday, 18 January 1978. Ash, P., and Jaspen, N. ”Optimum Physical Viewing Condi- tions for a Rearproject Daylight Screen." Techni- cal Report SDC 269-7-37. Instructional Film ResearchJReports. New YorE: U. .FNaval Special Devices Center, 1953. Cited by Godwin C. Chu and Wilbur Schramm, Learnin from Television, p. 38. Washington, D.C.: Tfie NationaI society of Profes- sionals in Telecommunications, n.d. Barnhart, C. L., editor. The American College Dictionary. New York: Random House, 1963. 195 196 Blau, Harold. "Written Composition and Oral Discourse." English Journal 57 (March l968):369-7l. Cited by Hardld G. Shane, James Walden, Ronald Green, Interpreting Language Arts Research for the TEacher. Washington, D.C.: Association fdr Supervision and Curriculum Development, N.E.A., 1971, p. 86. Bruner, Jerome S. The Process of Education. New York: Vintage Books, 1963. Burton, Nancy. A Progress Report on the Scoring of Writing of the NationaIIAssessment. National Assessment of Educational Progress. Denver: N.A.E.P., April 2, 1974. Busk, Patricia. Counseling Personnel Services, College of Education, Michigan State University. Telephone conversation, 10 May 1977. Byers, Joseph. Coordinator of Office of Consultation Research, College of Education, Michigan State University. Conversation, Wednesday, 25 January 1978. Campbell, Donald T., and Stanley, Julian C. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Research. Chicago: Rand McNalIy and”Co., I966f’ Capps, Barbara H. "The Past Ig Prologue." Viewpoints 50 (Bloomington: Indiana University, Janaury l974):5. Chu, Godwin C., and Schramm, Wilbur. Lgarning_from Television. Washington, D.C.: The National Society of Professionals in Telecommunications, n.d. Chubb, Percival. The Teachin of English. New York: The MacmilIan Co., 19 2. Cited By Kenneth J. Kantor, "Creative Expression in the English Curriculum: An Historical Approach.” Research in the Teaching of English 9 (Spring 1975):8} Churchill, Bob. Churchill Films. Telephone conversation, Thursday, 19 January 1978. Conover, W. J. Practical Nonparametric Statistics. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., I97I. Conway, J. K. "Multiple Sensory Modality and Problem of Sign Types." A-V Communications Review (1967):375. 197 Cook, John 0. "Research in Audio-Visual Communication." Visual Communication. Washington, D.C.: AECT, I960. Cooper, Charles R., and Odell, Lee. Evaluating Writing: Describing, Measuring, Judging. Champaign: NCTE, 1977. Culkin, John. ”Doing the Truth." In Doing the Media, pp. 5-8. Edited by Kit Laybourne. New York: Center for Understanding Media, 1972. DeHaven, Edna. "A Questioning Strategy Model for Creative Writing." Elementary English (September 1973): 959-61. Diederich, Paul B. Measuring Growth in English. Champaign: N.C.T.E.,I974. Dixon, John. Growth Through English. Oxford University Press, 1969. Edmund, N. R. "Relationship Between Prior Experiences and the Creative Quality of Stories of Fifth Grade Children." Elementary English 35 (April 1958): 248-49. Cited by Alvina T. Burrows, ed., Children's Writing: Research in Com osition and Relatéd’ Skills. Chimpaign: NCTE?_I961. Educational Technolo Definition and Glossa;y of Terms. Vol. 1. Was ington, . .: , . . Emig, Janet. Tape recording of speech delivered at Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, April 13, 1978, "Research on Writing." Ewing, June B. ”A Study of the Influence of Various Stimuli on the Written Composition of Selected Third Grade Children." Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University. 1967. University Microfilms, vol. 28, Ann Arbor, p. 4525. ED 033120. Frase, Lawrence T. ”Effect of Question Location, Pacing, and Mode Upon Retention of Prose Material.” Journal of Educational Psychology 59 (1968):244-49. Freden, Sharon E. ”The Effects of Planned Introductions on the Written Responses of Selected Ninth Grade Students to Selected Short Experiential Films.” University of Colorado, 1973. Dissertation Abstracts 34 (June 1974):?464-65. 198 Frye, Northrop. Cited by John S. Katz, A Curriculum in Film, p. 3. Curriculum Series 137—TheOntario Institute for Studies in Education, n.d. Getzel, Jacob, and Jackson, Phillip. Creativity and Intelligence. New York: Wiley, 1962. Cited by E. BrooEs Smith, Kenneth S. Goodman, and Robert Meredith, Language and Thinkin in School, p. 129. Holt, Rinehart and Winston,dl9 6} Golub, Lester S., and Fredrick, Wayne C. "An Analysis of Children's Writing Under Different Stimulus Conditions." 32search in the Teaching of English 4 (Fall 1970):168¥80. Goodwin, Arthur B. Handbook of Audiovisual Aids and Techniquestfor Teaching‘EIementar School Sfib'ects. New Yofk: Parker Pub1i§hing Co., Inc., I969. Graves, D. H. "Children's Writing: Research Directions and Hypotheses Based Upon an Examination of the Writing Processes of Seven-Year-Old Children." Ph.D. dissertation, State University of New YOrk at Buffalo, 1973. Dissertation Abstracts Inter- National 34 (1974):6255A. Cited By Sara W. Lundsteen, Hel for the Teacher of Written Composi- tion. Champaign: NCRE, 1976, pp. 13-14- Hays, William L. Statistics for the Social Sciences. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., I979. Heys, Frank, Jr. "The Theme-a-Week Assumption: A Report of an Experiment.” English Journal 51 (May 1962): 320-22. Cited in Shane et al., Interpretin Language Arts Research for the Teacher, p. l. Hillerich, R. L. "Evaluating Process and Product in Children's writing." Paper presented at the annual meeting of NCTE, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 1973. Cited in Lundsteen, Help_for the Teacher of Written Compgsition, p. 56. Hinsdale, B. A. Tgaching the Language Arts: SpeechL Reading, Com osition. Appleton, New York, 1896. Cited by Bar ara apps, ”The Past IS Prologue,” p. 11. - Hoban, C. F. The State of the Art of Instructional Films. Stanford: ERIC Clearinghouse on Media and Tecfi- I noloQY: September 1971. 199 . Focus on Learning. Washington, D.C.: American CounciI on Education, Committee on Motion Pictures in Education, 1942. Cited by Walter A. Wittich and John G. Fowlkes, Audiovisual Paths to Learning. Harper and Brothers PuinShers, 1952, p. 21. Hoban, Charles F., and Ormer, Van. Instructional Film Research 1918-1950 (Rapid Mass Learning). Techni- caI Report No. SDC7269-7:19, NAVEXOS P-977, Special Devices Center, Long Island, New York. Cited by Robert C. Snider, Visual Communication, "Selection and Use of Visual Media."C_Wa§hington, D.C.: AECT, 1960, p. 127. HOOper, R. A. "A Diagnosis of Failure." A-V Communica- tions Review 17 (1969):245-64. Cited by John 0. Cook, Visual Communication. Washington, D.C.: AECT, 19607 p. 100. Hovland, C. I.; Lumsdaine, A. A.; and Sheffield, F. D. Experiments in Mass Communication. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1949. Howell, John J. "The Effects of Educational Films on Student Participation in Discussion." Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, 1954. Cited by Arthur A. Lumsdaine and Mark A. May, Learning from Films. New Haven: Yale University Press,1958, —7pp. 11-27. Hunkins, Francis P. Questioning Strategies and Techniques. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 19721 Hunt, Kellogg. Grammatical Structures Written at Three Grade Levels. Urbdna, Illinois: NCTE, I965. . "Recent Measures in Syntactic Development." Cited in Children and Writing in the Elementary School. Edited by Richard L. Lawson. New York: Oxford University Press, 1975, pp. 67-68. Huntington, Jefferson R. "Effects of Instructional Vari- ables on Syntactic Complexity and Clarity in Children's Written Composition." Ph.D. disserta- tion, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey, 1968. Cited in Shane et al., Interpreting Language Arts Research for the Teacher, p. 94. Isaac, Stephen, and Michael, William B. Handbook in Research and Evaluation. San Diego: Pufilishers, 1976. 200 Johnson, Ted. "Using Film in the Classroom." Paper presented at the NCTE National Convention, Las Vegas, November 1971. ERIC Doc. 085 759, p. 8. Jones, Tudor Powell. Creative Learning in Perspective. New York: John WiIey and Sons, 1972. Kafka, T. T. "A Study of the Effectiveness of Four Motivational Stimuli on the Quality of Composition of Intermediate Students in One School District." Ph.D. dissertation, St. John's University, 1971. Dissertation Abstracts International 32 (1971): 2549A. Cited in Lundsteen, Help for the Teacher of Written Composition, p. 35. Kantor, Bernard J. "An Exploratory Study of the Effects of Inserted Questions in the Body of Instructional Films." Ph.D. dissertation, University of Southern California, 1959. Kantor, Kenneth J. "Creative Expression in the English Curriculum: An Historical Approach." Research in the Teachingof English 9 (Spring 19757:7. Kemp, Jerrold E. Planning and Producing Audiovisual Materials. Chandler Publishing Co., 1968. Knowlton, D. C., and Tilton, J. W. Motion Pictures in History Teaching. New Haven: Yale UniVersity Press, 1929. Cited in Wittich and Fowlkes, Audiovisual Paths to Learning, p. 21. Krasker, Abraham. "A Critical Analysis of the Use of Motion Pictures by Two Methods." The Educational Screen 20 (l941):303-13. Cited in Wittich and Fowlkes,_§udiovisual Paths to Learning, p. 21. Landers Film Reviews: Information Guide to 16mm Films. 1941-1978. Los Angeles, California. Laque, Carol F., and Sherwood, Phyllis A. ‘A_Laboratory Approach to Writing. Champaign: NCTE, 1977. Lowery, Lawrence F. "Learning about Instruction: Ques- tioning Strategies." A Handbook to Accompany a Personal Worksho . Berkeley: university of California, 197 . Cited in Thomas Hawkins, Grou In ui Techniques for Teaching Writing. Champaign: NCTE, I976, p. 39. 201 Lucking, Robert A. "A Study of the Effects of a Hierarchi- cally-Ordered Questioning Technique on Adolescents' Responses to Short Stories." University of Nebraska, 1975. Dissertation Abstracts Inter- national 36 (1976715185A. Lundsteen, Sara W. Children Learn to Communicate. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1976. . Help for the Teacher of Written Composition. Champaign: NCRE, 1976. McAnany, Emile G., S.J., and Williams, Robert, S.J. The Filmmaker's Handbook. Glen Rock, New Jersey: Deus Books, Paulist Press, 1965. McGrane, J. F., and Baron, M. L. "A Comparison of Learning Resulting from Motion Picture Projector and Closed Circuit Television Presentations." Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers Journal 68 (1959):824427. Cited by Chu and Schramm, Learning from Television, p. 40. Manzo, Anthony V. "Improving Reading Comprehension Through Reciprocal Questioning.” Syracuse Univer- sity. pissertation Abstracts International 30 (1970):5344-A. May, Mark A., and Lumsdaine, Arthur A. Learning From Films. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 1958. Mayo, Nolie B. "The Effects of Discussion and Assignment Questions on the Quality of Descriptive Writing of Tenth Grade Students." Memphis State University, 1975. Dissertation Abstracts International 36 (1976):78§9-A. Meierhenry, Wesley C. Enriching the Curriculum Tgrough Motion Pictures. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, Nebraska, 1952. Mellon, John C. National Assesgment and the Teaching of English. Champaign: NCTE, I975. Michael, D. N., and Maccoby, N. "Factors Influencing Verbal Learning from Films Under Varying Condi- tions of Audience Participation." Journal of Experimental Psychology 46 (1953):4II-I8. Cited Chu andSchramm, Learning From Television, p. 53. 202 Miller, J.; Levine, S.; and Sternberger, J. "The Effects of Different Kinds of Review and of Subtitling on Learning from a Training Film (a replicative study)." Unpublished, 1952. Cited in Cook, "Research in Audio—Visual Communication," p. 100. Minor, Billy J., and Cafone, Hal. "Reading Techniques Make Media Meaningful." Audiovisual Instruction 22 (December l977):19-20. Moffett, James, and Wagner, Betty Jane. Student-Centered Language Arts and ReadingLK-l3. 2nd Edition. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1976. Muskovitch, Arlene. Educational Representative, National Film Board of Canada, Province of Ontario. Telephone conversation, 26 January 1978. National Assessment of Educational Progress. Expressive Writing--Se1ected Results from the Second National Assessment of writing. Writing Report'No. 05-W-02. Denver, NovemberSI976, p. 25. Ontario Institute for Studies in Education. Use of Film in the Teaching of English. Toronto, 1971. Petty, Walter T.; Petty, Dorothy C.; and Becking, Marjorie F. Experiences in Language. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1976. "The 1977 Gallup Poll of the Public's Attitude Toward the Public Schools." Phi Delta Kappan 59 (September l977):45. Phillips, Jean. Learning Through Pyramid Films: A Guide for the Teachér. Santa Monica: PyramiddFilm Corporation,4I978. Porter, John W. Interpretive Manual 1977-1978. Lansing: Michigan Department of Education, 1978. Robards, Shirley N. "Teachers, Textbooks, and Tribula- tions.” VieWpoints 50 (January l974):34. Roth, Audrey J. "Success and Distress in a Media-Oriented Classroom." Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Southeast Conference on English in the Two-Year College, February 1974. ERIC Doc. 090548. 203 Rothkopf, Ernst 2., and Bisbicos, Ethel E. ”Selective Facilitative Effects of Interspersed Questions on Learning from Written Materials." Journal of Educational Psychology 58 (February I967):56-61. Salomon, Gavriel, and Clark, Richard E. "Reexamining the Methodology of Research on Media and Technology in Education." Review of Educational Research 47 (Winter l977):103. Sanford, Monard G. "Humanizing Technology: Perspectives and Prospectus." AECT address, April 18, 1972. ERIC Doc. ED 062816, p. 8. Shane, Harold G.; Walden, James; and Green, Ronald. Ipterpreting_Language Arts Research for the Teacher. Washihgton,DTC.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum DevelOpment, 1971. Sheeley, Stuart L. "Tape Recorders and Writing: Innovation in Indianapolis." English Journal 57 (May 1968): 637-40. Cited in Shane et al., Interpretin Language Arts Research for the Teacher, p. 96. Sheridan, Marion C. The Motion Pictuge and the Teachin of English. New Yofk: Appleton-Century-Crofts, NCTE, Sheviakov, G. V. "Teaching the Disadvantaged.” Tape cassette album #5. Los Angeles: Listener Corpora- tion, 1971. Cited by Lundsteen, Hel for the Teacher of Written Composition, pp. 59-33. Simonson, Michael R. "Liking and Learning Go Hand in Hand.” Audiovisual Instruction 23 (March 1978):l8. Smith, E. Brooks; Goodman, Kenneth S.; and Meredith, Robert. Lan ua e and Thinking in School. 2nd Edition. HoIt, Rinehart andCWinston, 1976. Smith, Helen K. ”Identification of Factors that Inhibit Progress in Reading." Cited by Shane et al., IpterpretingLangpage Arts Research for the Teacher, p. 9T. Snider, Robert C. “Selection and Use of Visual Media." Visual Communication. Washington, D.C.: AECT, I920. Snoddy, James S. “English Composition in Elementary Schools.” Education 20 (February 1900):353—61. Cited in Capps, aThe Past lg Prologue,” p. 14. 204 Stauffer, Russell G. Teaching Reading as a Thinking Process. New York? Harper and Row, Inc., 1969. Stern, Adele H. "Using Films in Teaching English Composi- tion." English Journal 57 (May 1968):646. ERIC Doc. E13631 177. Tabachnick, Robert B., and May, Frank B. "Effects of Three Different Stimuli on the Creativity of Children's Compositions." University of Wisconsin, 1965. ERIC Doc. 003461. Travers, Robert M. W. Research and Theory Related to Audiovisual InformationTransmission.Washing- ton, D.C.: U.S. Department of HeaIth, Education and Welfare, Office of Education, Contract No. 3-20-003, 1967. Uehara, Betty K. "The Effects of Three Different Stimuli on Third and Fifth Grade Written Composition." Ph.D. dissertation, The University of Arizona, 1974. Dissertation Abstracts International 35 (December l974):3582-A. VanderMeer, Abram W. "Relative Effectiveness of Instruc- tion by: Films Exclusively, Films plus Study Guides, and Standard Lecture Methods." Pennsyl- vania State College, July 1950. ERIC Doc. 053567. Vance, Jimmy S. "The Influence of a Teacher Questioning Strategy on Attitude and Critical Thinking." .Arizona State University, 1972. Dissertation Abstracts International 33 (1972):669A. vygotsky, L. S. Thou ht and Lan ua e. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press, 19 . ited in SmiEh et al., Language and Thinkingin School, p. 15. Wirtz, Willard W. Interviewed by Harold G. Shane, Phi Delta Ka an, "The Academic Score Decline: Are the Facts the Enemy of Truth?" (October l977):86. Wittich, Walter A., and Fowlkes, John G. Audiovisual Paths to Learning. Harper and Brothers Publishing, 1952.