Improving media writing with ability groups

Instructors sometimes mutter the following phrase after they've graded a stack of papers from a media writing class: "Students can either write, or they can't." Does this mean that only "good" student writers can do well in a media writing class? And does it mean that we, as instructors, can have little effect on improving the ability of the "not-sogood" writer? The main purpose of this research is to examine whether remedial students who receive special instruction can improve their writing over the course of a semester to match the skill level of an effective student writer. Success in mastering news writing skills can be evaluated by students' handling of both content issues (identification of the lead, selection and organization of information, and accuracy in reporting facts) and mechanical issues (proper use of English grammar and Associated Press style). This study examines the use of ability grouping in a mass media writing course to improve students' deficits in both content and mechanical skills. Improvement in writing can be assessed by scores on tests of mechanical skills or by evaluating a piece of writing itself. In this study, news stories of 161 students are content analyzed at three points during a semester to measure changes in quality that may be influenced by ability grouping. In addition, students' scores on grammar and style tests are tracked throughout the semester to explore the relationship between performance on a grammar skills test and ability to write a complete story. Background Scholars have documented journalism students' lack of mastery in both content and mechanical skills. For example, studies by Williams (1983), Stone (1990), and Auman (1995) reported professors' and professionals' perceptions that journalism students' basic content and mechanical skills were deficient. To remedy these deficiencies, some journalism programs have required students to pass grammar and language proficiency tests before enrolling in journalism writing courses. John, Ruminski and Hanks (1991) reported that 36.4 percent of the 236 journalism programs they surveyed required tests of English writing skills, while Oukrop, Brown and Parsons reported that 31 percent of the 183 journalism programs they surveyed required language skills exams for entrance. Adams (1978) reported that faculty in large journalism programs, which enrolled 500 or more majors, generally believed that proficiency tests were better used to pinpoint students' weaknesses than to exclude students from courses. Some journalism programs have created writing labs or remedial tutoring programs in which students work to improve deficiencies in mechanical skills (Ryan and Pruitt, 1978; Hynes, 1978; Thayer, 1978; DiNicola, 1994), while other programs have standardized the content of all basic writing courses as a way to ensure students master a common set of skills (Blanchard, 1984). The success of these techniques in improving student writing has been mixed (Hynes, 1978; Thayer, 1978; Blanchard, 1984). In English writing courses at the elementary, secondary and college levels, teachers long have experimented with proficiency testing and remedial measures, including the use of ability groups, to improve students' skills. Ability groups place students in groups with students of similar ability. Studies that support ability grouping suggest students may perform better and teachers may be more effective in addressing students who share similar abilities (Oakes and Lipton, 1994). Some evidence, in fact, supports the use of ability grouping to challenge higher-level students and to improve the performance of students at all skill levels in high school (Newfield and McElyea,1983). On the other hand, ability grouping has been criticized for potentially "ghettoizing" students by race, ethnicity, or socioeconomic class, which then impairs their self-esteem. According to Slavin and Braddock (1994, p. …