| The writing performance of eighth-grade students in America is a key concern for testing at the state and national level. Past research asserted that revision was the most difficult part of the writing process, especially for low performers. The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of an instructional intervention for revision, interpretive feedback, by implementing it with low performing eighth-grade students. Prior to this research, a pilot study was conducted to investigate this revision approach with 2 low performing eighth-grade writers. Social cognitive and metacognitive theory formed the theoretical framework for examining students' writing quality, self-efficacy beliefs, and use of interpretive feedback.; This 12-week quasi-experimental multiple-case study used mixed methods to investigate two groups of 10 eighth-grade participants from two different classrooms having the same English teacher. A two-factor mixed design compared writing quality between and within groups. Both groups wrote pretest and posttest papers on three informative essay tasks collected for rater scoring after the study. Papers were scored holistically and analytically with the six-trait rubric. The experimental group met as a focus group before and after the study to share perspectives on writing and revision. The experimental group received modeled and scaffolded instruction using think-aloud feedback for global revision. Student dyads used think-aloud protocols for feedback and revision. The control group received revision instruction in the classroom from the teacher. The teacher was interviewed before and after the study. Data, analyzed using content analysis, included a focus group, classroom observations, teacher interviews, verbal reports, and statistical scores.; Quantitative results were mixed. A Mann-Whitney U test showed a statistically significant difference between groups on writing quality, whereas the Wilcoxon matched-pairs test showed no statistically significant differences within groups except for one score (word choice) on the last task in the experimental group likely due to chance. Qualitative results showed students began with a lack of interest, capability, and knowledge for revision. After receiving the instructional intervention students perceived improvement in all three areas. This study concluded that to improve writing, students require explicit instruction in global revision and attention to self-efficacy beliefs. |
