How Effective are Writing Interventions on Writing Outcomes, Qualities, and Attitudes? A Large-Scale Meta-Analysis for Postgraduate Theses in Türkiye
Öz
This meta-analysis examined 137 thesis studies on writing interventions in Turkish schools. After removing outliers, overall effect sizes were calculated from 129 studies (627 test results) for writing outcomes, 103 studies for quality, and 32 studies for attitude. Robust variance estimation was used to address dependency in studies reporting multiple effect sizes. Results showed large effects on writing outcomes (g = 1.17) and quality (g = 1.43), with moderate effects on attitudes toward writing (g = 0.59). Among interventions, Self-Regulated Strategy Development, graphic organizers, pre-writing strategies, process approach, strategy teaching, text-based teaching, and various text structure instructions had larger effects. Meta-regression models revealed genre instruction studies had larger effects on quality, while studies with two different teacher implementers showed larger effects on attitude. Grade level+genre-based and pilot study+genre-based+grade level models explained 16% of variance in writing quality. These findings provide an evidence-based framework for effective writing instruction.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Turkish language education, writing intervention, quality of writing, writing attitude, meta-analysis
Etik Beyan
Due to the scope and method of the study, ethics committee permission was not required.
Kaynakça
- Atkinson, D. L. (1993). A meta-analysis of recent research in the teaching of writing: Workshops, computer applications, and inquiry [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Purdue University.
- Borenstein, M. (2019). Common mistakes in meta-analysis and how to avoid them. Biostat, Inc.
- Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, R. H. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis. John Wiley & Sons.
- Borenstein, M., Hedges, L., Higgins, J., & Rothstein, R. H. (2022). Comprehensive meta-analysis version 4. Biostat Inc.
- Brindle, M., Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Hebert, M. (2016). Third and fourth-grade teacher's classroom practices in writing: A national survey. Reading and Writing, 29(5), 929–954.
- Burnham, C. C. (2010). New rhetorics. In T. Enos (Ed.), Encyclopedia of rhetoric and composition: Communication from ancient times to the information age (pp. 461–464). Routledge.
- Carter, E. C., Schönbrodt, F. D., Gervais, W. M., & Hilgard, J. (2019). Correcting for bias in psychology: A comparison of meta-analytic methods. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 2(2), 115-144. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245919847
- Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Cooper, H., Hedges, L. V., & Valentine, J. C. (2019). The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis. Russell Sage Foundation.
- Deeks, J. J., Higgins, J. P. T., & Altman, D. G. (2008). Analyzing data and undertaking meta-analyses. In J. P. T. Higgins, & S. Green (Eds.), Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions (pp. 243–296). John Wiley & Sons.
