INTRODUCTION TO RESEARCH IN WRITING

Basturi Hasan
Fakultas keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan Universitas Lampung

Abstract: Research is a systematic approach to finding answers to

questions . It is a continuing endeavor that takes many forms in
many different domains. At one level writing research does not differ
from research in other fields. It is true that writing instruction has
been long established, research to understand or explain the writing
process began on a large scale during the past decade. The early
focus of writing research was more meaning based and holistic in
scope. Only recently have writing researchers begun to examine the
sub-processes in writing. In this article, we will discuss and illustrate
the techniques, content, and forms of research in writing, Also we
will see how some general research principles apply to studies in
writing.

Key words: evaluative manipulations, meta analyses, miscue analysis

INTRODUCTION

The surest avenue to improvement of educational practice will occur

through the application of knowledge derived from careful research. That is to

say, research helps us understand the key elements of successful learning and

teaching, so educational applications can accomplish the widest possible effects

(Kamil, et al, 1985).

By the same token, this paper will try to help reader understand writing

research. Research in writing examines a wide variety of problems with a broad

range of techniques from many different perspectives. Hopefully, knowledge in

this area will help practitioners come to terms with many of the techniques and

perspectives of writing research, so they can recognize and evaluate the relevance

and validity of findings and apply them accordingly in their educational situation.

1
 It is said that many educators find it difficult to conduct the large-scale

research necessary for implementation and instructional change program, but

there is usually a large body of research literature on most educational methods

and practices, and it is useful to consult this literature so trial-and-error can be

minimized or eliminated from decision making. There are no guarantees, though,

that the answers drawn from available research will match the problems in any

specific situation or that the application of available answers will produce perfect

results. This is because research is a continuing endeavor, answers are obtained in

slow, methodical, and often unpredictable ways. Hence, this article will try to

open insight of educators so that they can locate, read and understand the

possibilities and limitations of writing research particularly.

To benefit from this article, it will be useful to have had an introduction to

statistics. Should anyone needs or desires to learn more about any of the statistical

topics, a list of more detailed and advanced sources is provided in sources of

educational research books written by representative experts. In the next parts,

how some general research principles in terms of techniques, content and forms of

research in writing will be illustrated.

WHAT IS WRITING RESEARCH?

The early focus of writing research was more meaning based and holistic

in scope. Only recently have writing researchers begun to examine the sub-

processes in writing skills (Hays and Flower, 1980; Shaunessy, 1977; Britton,

1970). At one level writing research does not differ very much from research in

other fields. At another level, however, it can be seen that the research questions

2
posed, as well as methodologies used to answer these questions, reflect the special

characteristics of the domain themselves (Kamil at al, 1985).

Contemporary research in writing is rich mixture of influences from

cognitive and physiological psychology, linguistics, anthropology, computer

science, social psychology, learning theory, and educational practice. These

influence range from the most abstract theoretical points of view to the most

practical and applied knowledge. Some writing researches are aimed at

understanding the basic nature of writing process. Such efforts include the

generation of models and theories of process (Breiter and Scardamalia, 1982).

Another goal of writing research is to improve educational practices in

classroom and other instructional settings. These efforts include studies that

unobtrusively observe behaviors in natural instructional settings and those that

conduct highly controlled manipulations of variables affecting writing instruction.

Major efforts have been mounted at the institutes, laboratories, etc, to accomplish

this task in a systematic manner (Kamil et al, 1985).

RELATING GOALS TO RESEARCH QUESTIONS

When we read research, a primary task is to determine what the research

questions will be (Hatch and Farhady, 1982; Kamil et al, 1985). Whatever we will

need to answer every question depends on the purpose for which we prepare the

proposal. Research proposal will answer the questions that any critic might ask

when we first say that we have a question or questions that we want to address

(Hatch and Lazaraton, 1991). These questions can be at the level of attempting to

3
determine basic facts about cognitive processes, or they can be about instructional

decisions.

Before researchers can begin to deal with a problem, they must limit their

effort by stating specific questions they will attempt to answer (Kamil et al, 1985;

Hatch and Lazaraton, 1991). These questions serve to guide the research and keep

it focused on the topic at hand. A good research question is precise, unambiguous,

and limited in scope. Without such limits, the research might never be resolved.

In other words, if the question is not precise and unambiguous, researchers might

study one problem while thinking they are studying something else. Thus,

removing ambiguity assures that different researchers will be able to agree that

they are working on the same problem.

Research questions may be quite broad in scope – such as What are the

student-teacher interactions during instruction? – or they may be more narrow –

like What is the effect of sentence combining practice on students’ writing ability

in terms of language use? .As a study progress, these questions are often refined.

Many reports describe several studies or experiments that grew out of a single,

original question (Christopherson, 1978).

When one reads a research report, the first task should be to determine the

research question. One completing problem arises in experimental studies that

have null hypotheses, which are different from research questions. A null

hypothesis is a device used for statistical reasons; it states, as a hypothesis, that

there will be no observed differences in the experiment. In comparison, a research

question generally poses the problem without taking a stance about the outcome

of the study (Kamil et al, 1985).

4
RESEARCH IS INFLUENCED BY THEORIES AND MODELS

Basically, three theoretical orientations characterize or dominate most of

language skills research. The first of these is bottom-up or skills position. That is,

writing process begins with the organization of words, the construction of

sentences, and the parsing of sentences. This is because writing is assumed to be

initiated from within and between sentence information. In writing, such models

are implicit in widely used instructional materials. Research conducted from this

orientation emphasizes skills, sub-skills, decoding, spelling, mechanics, and the

like (Warriner and Griffith, 1977).

A second position is referred to as top-down or holistic. According to this

position, writing is assumed to be meaning generated from and focused on what

the writer is saying, has said, and is going to say. Research conducted from this

holistic position emphasizes the global nature of language and the centrality of

meaning (Britton, 1970; Kamil et al, 1985).

A final approach is called interactive or balanced. When research is

conducted from this orientation emphasis is divided appropriately between skills

and holistic variables. Hayes and Flower (1980) have a related view of writing as

a recursive activity involving planning, translating, and reviewing with an editing

sub-process that can interrupt any other sub-process.

These are certainly not the only theoretical positions, since much research

tends to be highly eclectic. Nonetheless, it can be noted that these positions may

not be found in pure forms in research studies. More likely, they will represent

5
general dispositions, rather than ironclad foundations for theories, as different

theorist focus on different aspects of writing process. Hence, one should be wary

of labels. When used with caution, however, these descriptions provide the proper

framework to interpret research by indicating where the theoretical emphasis has

been placed (Kamil et al, 1985).

RESEARCH IS SHAPED BY THE TYPES OF EXPERIMENTAL

DESIGNS USED

The design used in our research will be determined by our research

question. Some designs are fairly simple and others are extremely complicated.

However, for most studies in Applied Linguistics, particularly those related to

classroom research, the design must be complex. If we then wish to be able to

generalize from the results of our classroom experiment to other classrooms, from

our students to other students, we will need to choose a design that allows us to

share our findings as being relevant to other teachers and other classrooms (Hatch

and Farhady, 1985).

In classroom experimentation, for instance, we must be sensitive to the

internal and external validity. The internal validity is the extent to which the

outcome is a function of the factor we have selected rather than other factors we

have not controlled. In the example of writing improvement, this would be the

extent to which your special new method of instruction can count for the progress

the student made rather than factors other than your instruction method.

The external validity refers to the extent that the outcome of any research

study would apply to other similar situation in the real world. Suppose we are

6
investigating the effectiveness of a particular method of teaching /r/ vs. /l/ sounds.

If we conduct the study in a language laboratory with highly sophisticated

equipment and tightly controlled procedures, we will not be able to interpret the

results our study in terms of teaching those items in an ordinary classroom (Hatch

and Farhady, 1985).

Therefore, we must be sure that whenever we make a claim about the

effectiveness of any instruction, that the students not only would not have the

same gain without the instruction but also that they are really random

representative of language learners. A careful choice of design will help us avoid

these problems.

One way of avoiding problems is to use a control group in our experiment.

Not all research should be designed to yield explanatory information. Some effort

must be expended to collect descriptive data. Often, descriptive or observational

data are needed to identify or clarify instructional questions (Kamil et al, 1985).

To be clearer, suppose we want to investigate the effect of grammar correction on

the writing skills of EFL students. Our independent variable will be the amount of

correction and the way correction is given on composition errors. The dependent

variable is the degree of grammatical accuracy in our students writing samples. If,

at the end of semester or other time period we select, we might be willing to

conclude that the improvement was related to correction (Hatch and Farhady,

1982).

. Thus, our conclusion may be wrong. To deal with this problem, we need

to have a control group for comparison purposes. A control group refers to a

7
group of students whose selection and experiences are exactly the same as the

experimental group except that they do not receive the experimental treatment.

If we selected two similar groups of EFL students and corrected the errors

of one group but did not correct those of control group, we still found

improvement in our experimental group that far outweighed the improvement in

the control group, then our conclusion would be much more defensible. If it is

really only a matter of time, there should be no difference between the two

groups. Ultimately, having a control group contributes to the external validity of

the research lets us interpret our findings with more confidence. But until it is

certain that there are measurable and stable differences in those variables

mentioned previously, research manipulating them is futile.

Causal explanations, the ability to specify what variables produce specific

outcomes under all conditions are the seldom-attained goal of much educational

research. There are, however, many correlational or factor-analytic studies found

language skills research, even though no causal inferences can be drawn. Cause-

and-effect relationships require experimental designs that allow attribution of

effects to the manipulated variables. Correlational studies can be very useful when

variables cannot be manipulated for dealing with tests or when there are large

numbers of measurements involved.

In this type of study, the purpose of writing research is to determine

relationship between variables, such as, amount of instruction, type of practice in

writing, and outcomes or events, such as richness of written work, etc. In some

situations, we want to know what causes something we have observed. One

efficient method of doing this is to systematically manipulate parts of the

8
situation, under vary carefully controlled conditions, and see what the effects are.

Such manipulations involve selecting different values for the variables, such as

writing journal versus structured composition practice. The effects on situation

can then be attributed to the changes in the variables. Correlations are expressed

as numbers between – 1.0 and + 1.0. A correlation of + 1.0 means that one

variable can be predicted without from values of the other. The plus ( +) sign

means that the variables are positively related – as one goes up (or down), so does

the other.

On the other hand, a minus (─) sign means that the variables are

negatively or reciprocally related, i.e., when one goes up, the other goes down.

For example, the correlation between recognition of sentence structure errors and

composition skill scores is negative: The greater the frequency of errors, the lower

the composition score (Kamil et al, 1985)

THE ENVIRONMENT OF RESEARCH

Different research methods are used in different settings. Research may be

conducted in the field (a classroom) or in the laboratory (a clinic). Experimental is

easiest to conduct in a laboratory, where there is precise control over conditions.

However, controlling all conditions may lead to results that are not directly usable

in other settings. On the other hand, descriptive data are difficult but not

impossible to collect in a laboratory ( Carnine and Carnine, 1978). Consequently,

there are many research techniques that have been developed for use in

educational settings, including descriptive and ethnographic methods, i.e., one of

the major naturalistic inquiry alternative to experimental methodologies that

9
considers how experience of an individual, group, or society is influenced by and,

in turn, influences its surroundings context. It is field based rather than laboratory

based; that is, it requires that behavior be examined in natural settings.

The term ethnography refers to the anthropological process of studying a

whole culture. So it is a description of what culture is, what being a member of

that culture means, and how that culture differs from other cultures. An

ethnographic is a the product of systematic observations, interviews, and case

histories. This is because emphasis is on obtaining detailed descriptions of

processes and interaction that occur as people engage in everyday activities within

and across variety of settings, i.e., on describing natural interrelationships among

people, among events, and between people and events. A major aspect of

naturalistic inquiry suggests that behavior should be studied in its regularly

occurring time, place, and situation (Kamil et al, 1985). This permits the natural

balance of intervening variables to be maintained (Bronfenbrenner, 1976).

In short, educational ethnography seeks to understand the culture of

educational learning process: (1) what occurring, (2) how it is occurring, (3) how

participants perceive the event, (4) what is required to participate as a member of

that educational group (writing group, class, etc), and what social and academic

learning takes place (Kamil et al, 1985).

RESEARCH METHODOLOGIES: AN OVERVIEW

The introduction tells us what the study is about. While the method section

tells us how the study will be carried out. Typically, it begins with a section

describing the data source, i.e., the unit of observation, e.g., the students and their

10
characteristics, or the classes and their characteristics, or the composition

classifications and characteristics, or the classes and characteristics of objects

from which the data are drawn (Hatch and Lazaraton, 1991).

In experimental research, one manipulates variables and observes changes

in performance. However, many problems in writing cannot be studied this way.

For example, it would be unethical to induce writing disability to study the

effectiveness of various methods of remediation. Instead, case history methods,

ethnographic, as well as descriptive techniques, can effectively be used to study

these sorts of problems. This is so since in a case history study, an attempt is made

to observe an individual or a group for an extended period of time and, if

necessary to depend on other record for supporting or supplementary data. This

value allows one to study in depth the specific implementations of programs or

methods based on other research data.

So, if, for instance, we find that a method does not work when we use it in

a real situation, we have probably missed an important variable in the other

studies. It is then a check on the transferability or generalizability of our research

results. The potential flaw in this design is that the history is not under the

investigator’s control. Full and accurate records may not be available; the

necessary information may never have been recorded. Despite this potential

problem, case histories are often useful in studying a problem or proposed

solutions to the problems. That is, case histories often provide an accurate view of

how an individual, or a group of individuals reacts in a realistic situation, without

intervention by researchers.

11
 Descriptive research and ethnographic research both describe, but they

stem from different philosophies. In descriptive studies, the investigator decides

the questions to be answered and the categories in which to distribute observations

prior to data collection. The characteristics of interest are defined a priori. In

contrast, pre-data collection decisions are studiously avoided in ethnographic

studies, as it assumed that such preconceptions will lead the investigator to ignore

important features of the phenomena being observed. Also, descriptive research

will always have a quantitative outcome, even if the results are only reported as

frequencies or percentages. On the other hand, ethnographic investigations may

report quantitative outcomes, but this is not necessary. Often, ethnographies reject

the apparent objectivity of quantitative results in favor of a more subjective

qualitative analysis by the observer (Kamil et al, 1985).

No important manipulation of conditions is appropriate in descriptive

research, while experiments manipulate or change the situation in order to reveal

causal connections. The act of data collection itself is not considered to be a

manipulation, unless it appears that this has influenced the results in some way

(Hatch and Lazaration, 1991). For example, if an experimenter wanted to find out

the incidence of some behavior during writing, it would be necessary to have

subjects do some writing practices. Having subjects do such writing would only

be considered to be a manipulation if in the data collection conditions were so

different from typical writing conditions that the outcomes were influenced.

Descriptive and experimental research are similar in both theory based rather than

data based. In other words, the data collection, instruments and categories of

analysis in descriptive and experiment research are based upon previous research

12
and theory, rather than being an outgrowth of the data collected for that particular

study (Kamil et al, 1985).

Another common method is correlational study (Sullivan, 1972; Popham,

1972).This technique is common when the variables of interest are not directly

manipulable . For instance, the use of good and poor writers as an independent

variable produces many correlational studies; the observed differences in

performances are correlated with differences in writing ability

Underscore the notion that correlational studies do not strictly allow causal

conclusion. However, strong correlation suggest causal relationships, even though

correlation does not imply causation. As with case histories, such suggestions

have to be verified by other techniques. When regression analyses are used,

prediction is possible, but explanation still does not result. This is true for

multivariate analyses: What changes is the number of variables that can be

accounted for in prediction and the precision of the prediction.

The term multivariate analysis refers to a collection of statistical

techniques used to examine the relationship between three or more variables.

These techniques are being used in place of more traditional ANOVA techniques

because multivariate analysis offers the researcher a greater amount of flexibility

in the design of studies and requires fewer arbitrary decisions, that is., in the case

of, for example: How do I differentiate good and poor writer?, and the like. In

addition, multivariate analysis has become easier to do because of the availability

of computer programs capable of carrying out complex multivariate calculations

inexpensively and efficiently. Thus, this type of analysis is relatively easy to

perform and can be used to analyze many types of data to answer a variety of

13
research questions. In other words, multivariate analysis allows the researcher to

examine a wide spectrum of categorical, such as, sex, race, group, and so forth,

and continuous variables, e.g., IQ, writing scores, etc. In addition, the statistical

techniques can be employed to analyze data from descriptive or experimental

studies in equally appropriate ways (Kamil et al, 1985).

Factor-analytic studies are another way of dealing with descriptive data. It

is said that factor analysis enjoyed greater popularity in the past than it does today

(Davis, 1971). In the previous section of this article, it is suggested that we need

to narrow the scope of our research so that it would be feasible. Often this means

looking at the relation between two variables. When we do this, we inevitably

think of a third variable that may play a role or may influence the relation between

the original two variables. That is, our expertise in the field of language learning

tells us in the real world the picture is much more complex, hence, we must add

more pieces to the puzzle if we want to capture the essence of language learning.

As we add more variables, the research becomes increasingly complex even so

complex that we need to reduce large numbers of variables in some meaningful

way. The picture of the real world may also suggest that those variables

discovered to be important in language learning should be arranged in a particular

way. And so, models are proposed – for some reasons, these untested models are

called theories – for the learning process Obviously, the statistical procedures are

important because they give us a way of discovering factors that underlie

language proficiency, and hopefully language learning, and ways of testing

relationships among them (Hatch and Larazation, 1991; Kamil et al, 1985).

14
 Apparently, many problems can still be studied by using factor analysis.

For instance, attitudes are particularly amenable to study by this method according

to Kamil et all, while factor analysis does not allow causal inferences, it is, at this

rate, valuable for work in difficult problem areas. For example, these techniques

can show which of many variables acting on situation are most important and

which may be largely irrelevant (Hatch and Farhady, 1981; Kamil et all, 1985).

Historically, the two-group study has been the most common experimental

design. It operates quite simply: One group is given a treatment, and the other

function as a control group, receiving either nothing or some irrelevant condition

for comparison. Perhaps, this basic has been extended to produce the factorial

design in use today, i.e., two or more variables or factors are manipulated at the

same time, in the same study. All values of each variables are combined with all

values of the other variables to produce treatment combinations to be

administered. In other words, the use of factorial designs allows the effect of

several variables to be studied simultaneously. In addition, we can study the

interaction among factors, those conditions that occur when variables act

differently in combination than when they are observed in isolation. The greater

number of variables manipulated at once in a given setting, the more natural the

situation will be. This kind of research design leads us to view what

Bronfenbrenner (1976) used in his study called the desirability to find the so

called ecological validity of the research design.

Psychological researchers have recognized the difficulties inherent in

using group data in analyses. Some researchers in learning have advocated

intensively studying single or small number of subjects across an extended range

15
of time and behavior (Kamil et al, 1985). Perhaps the most prevalent paradigm in

language skills research using this single/small number of subjects (N)

methodology is due to miscue analysis (Goodman, 1965). Most of miscue studies

do analysis of extensive data collected in individual sessions with a few readers. A

primary argument for this methodology is that the relationships among responses

are often as important as their content (Kamil et al, 1985). In writing, conducting

extensive small small-N research, tracing the writing development of learners, the

collected data can be intensively analyzed because only a few subjects are

involved (Graves, 1975).

There are unavoidably potential risks involved in doing research with

single-N/small-N samples. Among these, as Kamil et al assert, is the potential for

studying non-representative individuals. Consequently, conclusions based on non-

representative data are inappropriate for general applications. The smaller the

sample will produce the greater the risk of error. Interpretations based on the such

data then have to be viewed with care. Thus, the researcher is especially obligated

to describe the subjects as carefully and thoroughly as possible.

Furthermore, small-sample paradigms necessitate repeated measures, and

therefore, both benefits and disadvantages of collecting repeated measures are

involved. For example, repeated measures allow individuals to serve as their own

controls, reducing the variance and increasing the precision of analysis. However,

when repeated measures are used, contrast effects may arise. That is, subjects may

react differently to the various treatments only because they realize the treatments

are different. In addition, repeated measures are subject to practice and fatigue

16
effects, further limiting the generalizability of repeated measures data (Hatch and

Lazaration, 1991; Kamil et al, 1985).

A variant of single-/N designs is the time series. In this type of study,

measurements are made many times, before and after administration of a

treatment. In other words, changes in performance can be observed over time and

as a function of the application of the treatment. Needless to say, that it is not

necessary to have a small or single N to use a time series design. However, the

extensive data collection required by this design makes it less practical to use

large group.

More sophisticated designs for experimental and quasi-experimental

studies in language skills are available. It is true that the ultimate goal of any

investigation is to conduct research that will allow us to show the relationship

between the variables we have selected. However, in social sciences in general,

and our field in particular, it is not realistic to limit our research to true

experimental designs only, that is, they have basically three characteristics: (1) a

control group or groups is present, (2) the subjects are randomly selected to the

groups, and (3) a pretest is administered to capture the initial differences between

the groups. The reason is that we are dealing with the most complicated of human

behaviors, language learning behavior (Hatch and Farhady, 1981).

The need for these more complex designs has derived from two sources.

On the one hand, researchers have realized the inadequacies of some conventional

methods of collecting data. For example, notions of ecological validity issued by

Bronfenbrenner (1976) have necessitated collection of much more data than was

traditionally required. Moreover, contemporary experiments require greater effort

17
in data reduction than in actual data analysis as any glance at writing journal will

indicate.

TYPES OF VARIABLES IN WRITING RESEARCH

We can expect variability in anything we observe. An EFL student’s

language skill may vary from week to week. We may be able to count for this

variation in individual performance by considering amount of construction. Skill

does not remain the same. The ability of a group of Indonesian students learning

English to recognize and reproduce the tone system may vary, We may be able to

account for this variability by determining whether the students have learned other

tone languages, young or old, male or female, etc. By analogy, different pieces of

text may vary in frequency of “hedges.” This is because, academic science text

may include many more lexical hedges, e.g., “it appears,” “it seems”, to certainty

of claims than other types of text materials. Variability and explanations of that

variability are central to research ( Hatch and Lazaration, 1991).

In general, three major classes of variables can be identified. The first is

the class of instructional variables, including, among others, instructional format,

amount of time on task, and type of materials. Topic, knowledge, and purpose of

materials have become predominant in current research. This class of variable is a

mixture of traditional types, like amount of time on task, and instructional

presentation, as well as less traditional types, like teacher, beliefs or other aspects

of teacher competence (Duffy and Metheny, 1979).

18
 The second group is the writer/learner variables. In turn, this group is

divided into individual variables, like language and language development,

cognitive processes, and cognitive development, along with more global variables,

like self-concept or socioeconomic and cultural factors.

The final of variables may be classified as environmental, which includes

such factors as classroom design and organization. Also involved are a number of

naturalistic variables dealing with student/teacher interaction (Kamil et al, 1985).

In short, a variable can be defined as an attribute of a person or of an

object which varies from person to person or from object to object, or from time

to time.

RESEARCH CAN BE SHAPED BY THE MANIPULATIONS OF THE

VARIABLES

Research often can be characterized by the number of factors manipulated.

Much language skill research has involved manipulating only a single variable

However, researchers increasingly use designs that manipulate several variables

simultaneously. This reflects the realization that clusters of variables have to be

studied to arrive at a thorough description or explanation of the process. A

complete description is, by definition, ecologically valid (Bronfenbrenner, 1976).

Other researches perform the so called evaluative manipulations, and

meta-analysis. In the cases of evaluative manipulations, a single value of a

variable is to determine whether there is some effect on behavior. Examples might

be in the test development or in testing a single teaching method or technique.

19
 Finally, there are studies of studies, or meta-analyses. In meta-analyses,

studies that have manipulated the same or similar variables are examined to

determine the amount of agreement among the studies and to estimate the size of

effects that can be expected. These meta-analyses are not primary manipulations

of variables. Instead, they are attempts to analyze the results of other studies to see

what it is that can be assumed to be true about, e.g., writing and writing process

(Kamil et al, 1985).

IN SUMMARY

In this article, there have a brief overview of the goals and constraints

posed in certain kinds of research in writing been provided. This paper has tried

to explain a good deal about writing skill, much of which is; hopefully, useful for

educational decision making. Apparently, to interpret research report, one must

understand research methodology, its advantages and limitations. The

methodology used to conduct a language skill study, e.g., writing research, has a

logic of its own, an internal logic so strong that it affects the design of experiment,

the procedures used, the data gathered, the analysis undertaken, and the way in

which the research is reported. Finally, an understanding of research methodology

will help readers know what information to look for and how to avoid

misinterpretations.

REFERENCES

Breiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1982). From Conversation to Composition: The

Role of Instruction in Developmental Processes. In R. Glaser (Ed.),
Advances in Instructional Psychology (Vol. 2). Hillsdale, NJ; Erlbaum.

Britton, J. 1970. Language and Learning. London: Penguin Books.

20
Bronfenbrenner, U. 1976. The Experimental Ecology of Education. Educational
Researcher, 5, 5 – 15.

Carnine, L., & Carnine, D. 1978. Determining the Relative Decoding Difficulty of
Three Types of Simple Regular Words. Journal of Reading Behavior, 10,
40 – 41.

Christopherson, S. 1978. Effects of Knowledge of Semantic Role on Recall of

Written Prose. Journal of Reading Behavior, 10, 249 – 256.

Duffy, G. G., & Metheny, W. 1979. The Development of Instrument to Measure

Teacher Beliefs about Reading. In M. L. Kamil & A. J. Moe (Eds.),
Reading Research: Studies and Applications pp 218 – 222. Climson, SC:
The National Reading Comference.

Davis, F. B. 1971. The Literature of Research in Reading with Emphasis on

Models. New Brunswick, NJ. Graduate School of Education, Rutgers
University.

Goodman, K. S. 1965. Analysis of Oral Reading Miscues: Applied

Psycholinguistics. Reading Research Quarterly, 1, 9 – 30.

Graves, D. 1975. An Examination of the Writing Process of Seven Year Old

Children. Research in Teaching of English, 9, 227 – 241.

Hatch, E, and Farhady, H. 1982. Research Design and Statistics for Applied
Linguistics. London: Newbury House Publishers, Inc.

Hatch, E., Lazaration, A. 1991. The Research Manual: Design and Statistics for
Applied Linguistics. Massachusetts: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.

Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. S. 1980. Identifying the Organization of Writing

Processes. In L. W. Gregg & E. R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive Processes
in Writing. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Kamil, M. L, Yudith, A. L., Timothy, S. 1985. Understanding Research in

Reading and Writing. Massachusetts. Allen and Bacon, Inc.

Popham, W. J. 1972. Simplified Design for School Research. New York:

American Book.

Shaunessy, M. P. 1977. Errors and Expectations. New York: Oxford University

Press.
Sullivan, H. J. 1972. Classifying and Interpreting Educational Research Studies.
New York: American Book.
Warriner, J. E., & Griffith, F. 1977. English Grammar and Composition:
Complete Course. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

21
22