Word+Processing

= Word Processing =

media type="custom" key="15611480" align="right"
Word processing systems are personal computer applications specifically utilized for the production of printable text material. Generally, word processor functionality includes, but is not limited to composing, editing and formatting text documents. In the early years (1980’s- 1990’s), such devices as electric typewriters were referred to as word processors. However, since the early 1990’s word processing applications such as Microsoft Word, Microsoft Works, and Apple’s Pages more accurately define the term. Enhancements in word processing technology have provided users with a variety of features that makes them effective and efficient tools for document production. Currently and more specifically, typical word processing applications contain spelling and grammar check, speech recognition, improved formatting options, simple revision tools, the production of legible characters, document sharing functionality, the ability to save documents in various formats, templates, tools to insert tables and figures, and mailing and merging document functionality (Morphy & Graham, 2011, p.641). Word processors have various uses and applications in businesses, homes and educational environments. While there are many word processing features widely available, businesses most often utilize word processing features to create letterheads, merge mailings, generate labels, format presentations and meeting minutes, create marketing and advertising material, and generate and review resume templates. Users in the home are likely to use word processors for writing letters, making labels, creating greeting cards and resumes, and personal planning and budgeting. Schools are more progressively using word processors in their curriculum. Educators generally utilize the application for basic text composition. As a consequence, the increased use of word processing systems by educators may in turn change the current accepted writing process; shifting the process from the creation of hand written multiple drafts, making revisions and the submission of a final handwritten copy to “revision, writing length, the application and use of a keyboard and the publication of text” (Schwartz, 2004, p.5-6).

Important Findings on Student Outcomes
Word processors are arguably the single most impactful technology that is used in education today. Word processors are user-directed, rather than-teacher instructed and may be incorporated into all areas of study. As a whole, the use of word processors for educational purposes has not only been significant, but research has illustrated that the use of word processors in education has had noteworthy impacts on several areas of student study. Significant areas of research conducted on the impact of word processors on education include, but are not limited to, the general writing process, the quality of work produced by students who utilize word processors, student accuracy and comprehension of spelling and grammar and utilizing word processors as a learning tool for students who learn English as a second language. Countless studies have exposed a positive correlation between using word processors in education and the above named categories as well as other areas of study.

A meta-analysis conducted by Goldberg, Russell and Cook (2003) illustrated that students who use word processors to complete assignments produce work that is, on average, of higher quality than those who do not. Specifically, the study revealed that students who use word processors construct work that is approximately 0.4 standard deviations better than those students who submit hand-written work. (Roblyer & Doering, 2010). The study also demonstrated that students were increasingly more connected in the revision methods of their work at an earlier stage and throughout the writing processes compared to those writing by hand (Roblyer & Doering, 2010). As these studies have pointed out, students are not only producing higher quality work, they are also more likely to be more engaged in their revisions to produce their final work.

As mentioned above, word processors offer an automatic spelling and grammar correction tool which likely enhances student writing. Some research has shown, however, that the utilization of this tool has in some cases decreased the accuracy of student work. Poulsen (1991) found that the spelling checker functionality of a word processor isolates approximately 80% of spelling mistakes. "The study found that of the 43 spelling check corrections, 26 replacements were correct and 17 replacements were incorrect" (Poulsen, 1991, p.77). However, when students used a word processor to correct their spelling or grammar or mistakes, students did not correct the mistake with an appropriate form or tense of the word. Also shown by the study, students who were not offered a correct term by the word processor did little to resolve the error in other ways (Poulsen, 1991). Although the goal of spelling and grammar check in a word processor is not intended to be inclusive, students may interpret the tool to be just that. The spell check feature in particular, checks the spelling of each individual word without regard to context. It is up to the students to apply specific knowledge about context and word tense in order to apply the suggested correctly-spelled word.

Using word processors to teach English as second language has also shown promising learning outcomes. For example, a study conducted by McNabb (2005) demonstrated the effect of word processors on the English writing skills of students who were learning English as a second language. The study illustrated two important findings. First, students who use word processing for writing compositions characteristically develop enhanced writing skills over those students who are not taught to write by means of word processing. However, it was also revealed that the use of technology in general has not produced ample effects on literacy comprehension. (McNabb, 2005). Even though the use of word processors have been shown to have positive effects on student writing when learning English as a second language, the same research illustrates that technology in general does not improve literacy comprehension.

In another study conducted on the use of word processors as a tool for student learning English as second language, sophomore Iranian students were tested on their writing skills with and without using a word processor. Two groups of students were studied, and each group of students was asked to write two paragraphs about two separate subjects. The treatment for the first group utilized a teacher correction method for student mistakes. The treatment for the second group was to type the paragraphs on a word processor and utilize their own correction methods. Both groups were then asked to make corrections and write their final copy. The study illustrated "that those students who created and corrected their writing by using a word processor produced more accurate writing than those whose work was correct by a teacher" (Behjat, 2011, p.1430). In addition to those findings, the study also concluded that students were more likely to be engaged in their revision process. "When the students who used a word processor made mistakes, the computer immediately alerted the student of their mistake and the students were able to correct the mistake. However, when students made mistakes during paper writing, teacher comments would be handed back in red ink markings throughout the paper" (Behjat, 2011, p.1433). This negative connotation seemed to discourage students in their writing process.

In general, many studies have illustrated that utilizing word processors has had a positive effect on student learning outcomes. From increasing the quality of student writing to utilizing word processing as an instructional tool for second language English learners, word processors appear to encompass many beneficial factors. Moreover, studies are showing that unintentional benefits are developing from the use of word processors in education; such as student confidence in their writing process. Although, the utilization of word processors is not all encircling and cannot possibly be substituted for instruction and learning of writing skills, the use of word processors has been and will continue to be a tool utilized by educators in their curriculum for writing support.

**Emerging Trends and Open Issues **

Nearly all content area classroom teachers are implementing the utilization of word processors as part of their instruction for students. Frequently, teachers require students to use a word processor for their final drafts of papers, lab reports, journals entries, etc. Since most professions require knowledge of word processors as well as keyboarding skills, teachers are attempting to expand student knowledge and experience by requiring the use of word processors in their classrooms. A majority of educators recognize the significance of word processors as productivity tools. “According to a 1993 study by Hadley and Sheingold, well informed teachers were extensively using word processing tools along with instructional software” (Jonassen, Howland, Marra, & Crismond, 2006, p.1).

The requirement of use of a word processor in classrooms is becoming more of a norm than a irregularity, but there are several issues with implementing word processing in education. These issues range from the high cost of supplying a sufficient number of computers in classrooms to altering the complete writing process as known by most teachers and students. Even though the use of word processors appears to be common ground among many schools, the discussion over the effect that word processors have on other areas of student study and the whether the use of word processors are in fact helping students become more effective remains at the forefront of technology education discussion.

The writing procedure as many students and teachers have known for several years is continually shifting with the increased use of word processors in education. Before word processors were developed students brainstormed topic ideas, wrote rough drafts, had a teacher or peer correct mistakes, rewrote their papers and finally hand-wrote or typed a final copy of the paper. The use of word processors make it simple to rearrange ideas, correct spelling and grammatical mistakes as students write, and allows for easy editing, and thus the writing process as a whole is shifting. Advocates for the age old writing process completed by hand question the use of word processors in the writing method from the beginning to final draft. Others view a word processor as a way to save time and help students piece together a final draft with more emphasis on extending thinking and less time spent on rewriting multiple drafts. Word processors allow students to complete the entire writing process in two or three steps, rather than a lengthy multiple step process.

A further concern of utilizing word processors in education is the cost to supply computers in schools with word processing software. Even though many schools are equipped with a sufficient number of computers to allow for students to spend some time using them, there may not be an adequate number to require that students use word processors for most or all assignments. Many families in the United States own at least one computer, but there are still many families that do not. Libraries are a good source for access to computers, but “the problem is even more difficult for those students whose homes are removed from libraries, as is the case in some of our Western States” (Braun, 1986, p. 146). If students are required to use a word processor, a solution for access to computers must be in place for all students to remain on a level playing ground.

Word processors may also have an effect on student hand writing. No formal research has been conducted on this subject, but small informal studies have shown that computer users’ hand writing skills deteriorate because of reduced opportunities to use them. (Roblyer & Doering, 2010).

Since word processing is noticeably making its way into more and more classrooms, the question of when or if even at all to teach keyboarding skills remains an open issue. Most schools offer one or two classes for keyboarding in sixth, seventh or eighth grade. However, the age at which to introduce keyboarding skills remains a current question. In addition, many argue that the extended amount of time spent in a keyboarding class is better spent on other content; and students will pick up keyboarding own their own over time (Robleyr & Doering, 2010). It is clear that keyboarding is necessary to be effective in utilizing a word processor. Keyboarding skills help students to focus on relaying thoughts to the text on the screen, rather than concentrating on keyboarding skills, which in turn helps students work more efficiently.

As Roblyer and Doering point out, the impact of word processing on assessment is still very unclear. In some schools, students are allowed to test their writing skills by using a hand written approach or a word processor. To further complicate the issue, if students choose to use a word processor, educators must make sure that students have the same level of knowledge about to use word processors to effectively test their skills. Also, “Educators must be careful to establish guidelines and equal training to ensure that graders do not inadvertently discriminate against those students who choose word processing”(Roblyer & Doering, p. 2, 2010).

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Research has shown that word processing may improve writing quality. This is true only if it writers are taught to use word processors in combination with good writing instruction (Roblyer & Doering, 2010). Additionally, students must also sufficiently learn the functionality of word processors. The spelling check feature of word processors, for example, allows students to increase their accuracy of spelling and perhaps explore and use new vocabulary. “Word processors make it possible for writers to change spelling mistakes without disfiguring the paper and allow students to make as many changes as necessary in accordance with the learning process of thinking about spelling” (Kochan, p. 220, 1987).

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Like many technologies utilized in the classrooms, word processors are a productivity tool that should not be circumvented in instruction. Word processors may be the single most impactful technology used in classrooms today. Although many studies have shown a positive correlation between the utilization of word processors and student writing quality, many unanticipated issues have surfaced with the increased use of the tool. With student improvement in quality of writing in such factors as spelling, grammar, comprehension and accuracy, the increased use of word processors carry such issues as the loss of the writing process, cost, and decreased handwriting skills. Overall, students making their way through school today will inevitably be exposed to and required to use word processors, and the likelihood of students not using word processors in education is becoming progressively less.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 18px;">References
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Behjat, F. (2011). Teacher correction or word processors: Which is a better option for the improvement of EFL students' writing skill?. //Journal of Language Teaching & Research//, //2//(6), 1430-1434. doi:10.4304/jltr.2.6.1430-1434

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Braun, L. (1986). The computer in the home — Boon or boondoggle? //Education and Computing//, //2//(1), 145-151. doi: 10.1016/S0167-9287(86)91325-7

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"> Jonassen, D., Howland, J., & Crismond, D. (2006). How does technology facilitate learning? In //Meaningful Learning with Technology.// Retrieved from <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">[]

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Kochan, B. (1987). How to handle children's spelling mistakes on the microcomputer? //Education and Computing//, //3//, 219-222. doi: 10.1016/S0167-9287(87)80022-5

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">McNabb, M. L. (2005). Raising the bar on technology research in english language arts. //Journal of Research on Technology in Education,// 38(1), 113-119. Retrieved from http:search.proquest.com/docview.274703131?accoutid=2909

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Morphy, P., & Graham, S. (2011). Word Processing programs and weaker writers/ readers: A meta analysis of research findings. //Reading and Writing,// 25(3), 641-678. doi: 10.1007/s11145-010-9292-5

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Poulsen, E. //<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"> (1991). //<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Writing processes with word processing in teaching english as a foreign language. //Computers & Education//, //16//(1), 77-81. doi: 10.1016/0360-1315(91)905-S

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Roblyer, M. D., & Doering, A. H. (2010). The impact of word processing in education. In //Integrating Educational Technology into Teaching//. Retrieved from http://www.education.com/reference/article/impact-word-processing-education/

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Schwartz, K., (2004). Word processors: Do they enhance elementary school children’s writing? Retrieved from <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"> http://www.eric.ed.gov.proxy.libraries.uc.edu/ERICWebPortal/search/recordDetails.jspERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED490646&searchtype=keyword&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&_pageLabel=RecordDetails&accno=ED490646&_nfls=false&source=ae

Reviewed By: (Jennifer Tewksbury, Christine Tan)