Writing as a Process in a University Physical Science Class [microform] / Paul B. Otto.

Writing in general is purported to be an all-important, most neglected area in education, especially in the area of science teaching. Several recognized authorities in the field of writing advocate that writing be taught in all the disciplines as well as in English. Since writing as a "process&...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Online Access: Request ERIC Document
Main Author: Otto, Paul B.
Format: Microfilm Book
Language:English
Published: [S.l.] : Distributed by ERIC Clearinghouse, 1985.
Subjects:

MARC

LEADER 00000nam a22000002u 4500
001 b6192134
003 CoU
007 he u||024||||
008 850304s1985 xx |||| bt ||| | eng d
005 20240722210818.1
035 |a (ERIC)ed254405 
040 |a ericd  |c ericd  |d MvI 
099 |f ERIC DOC #  |a ED254405 
100 1 |a Otto, Paul B. 
245 1 0 |a Writing as a Process in a University Physical Science Class  |h [microform] /  |c Paul B. Otto. 
260 |a [S.l.] :  |b Distributed by ERIC Clearinghouse,  |c 1985. 
300 |a 11 p. 
336 |a text  |2 rdacontent. 
337 |a microform  |2 rdamedia. 
338 |a microfiche  |2 rdacarrier. 
500 |a ERIC Note: Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (58th, French Lick Springs, IN, April 15-18, 1985).  |5 ericd. 
500 |a ERIC Document Number: ED254405. 
520 |a Writing in general is purported to be an all-important, most neglected area in education, especially in the area of science teaching. Several recognized authorities in the field of writing advocate that writing be taught in all the disciplines as well as in English. Since writing as a "process" rather than a "product" has been suggested by writing authorities, this study was conducted to compare the effect of writing as a process with the effect of writing as a product on the written communication skills of undergraduate students enrolled in a preservice physical science course for elementary school teachers. A pretest/posttest control group design was used. During the semester, control group students wrote papers on experiments they conducted; these papers were graded and returned without written comments. Experimental group students also wrote similar papers; however, these papers were returned without letter grades and with instructions to rewrite the papers based on comments provided by the instructor. To determine if a change in writing competency had taken place, all students wrote a two-page personal experience paper at the beginning (pretest) and end (posttest) of a semester. Results obtained from analyses of these papers show no difference in writing competency between experimental and control group students. (JN) 
521 8 |a Researchers.  |b ericd. 
533 |a Microfiche.  |b [Washington D.C.]:  |c ERIC Clearinghouse  |e microfiches : positive. 
583 1 |a committed to retain  |c 20240101  |d 2049101  |5 CoU  |f Alliance Shared Trust  |u https://www.coalliance.org/shared-print-archiving-policies  
650 1 7 |a College Science.  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a Higher Education.  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a Physical Sciences.  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a Preservice Teacher Education.  |2 ericd. 
650 1 7 |a Revision (Written Composition)  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a Science Education.  |2 ericd. 
650 1 7 |a Science Instruction.  |2 ericd. 
650 1 7 |a Writing (Composition)  |2 ericd. 
650 1 7 |a Writing Improvement.  |2 ericd. 
650 1 7 |a Writing Processes.  |2 ericd. 
856 4 2 |z Request ERIC Document  |u https://colorado.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://colorado.illiad.oclc.org/illiad/COD/illiad.dll?Action=10&Form=23 
907 |a .b61921348  |b 01-18-22  |c 10-10-10 
998 |a pas  |b 10-10-10  |c f  |d m   |e -  |f eng  |g xx   |h 0  |i 1 
956 |a ERIC 
999 f f |i 41f1be85-bc47-5c03-92d1-d4dd47e395fd  |s 5f01b8f0-244d-5911-99ea-d57e600c1318 
952 f f |p Can circulate  |a University of Colorado Boulder  |b Boulder Campus  |c Offsite  |d PASCAL Offsite  |e ED254405  |h Other scheme  |i microfiche  |n 1