The Missouri Reader Vol. 36, Issue 1 | Page 77

M2 – M 1
M2=Posttest Mean
M1=Pretest Mean
SD2 + SD1
2
SD2=Posttest Standard SD1=Pretest Standard
Using the means and standard deviation with the above formula the effect size
Deviation
Deviation
was calculated to be 0.61. That is about 2/3‘s of a standard deviation shift. This
shows a moderate effect on the change in student perceptive ability (Gay, Mills, & Airasian, 2009). For example, if the group
perceived that they were able to perform at 50% during the pretest, their perception after the conduction of the posttest would be at
70%.

Third Research Question
The third research question asked: Did students perceive that they were using metacognitive skills/strategies during peer writing
conferences? The data used to answer this question included a compilation of student reflective questionnaires. The data collected
revealed three categories based around student involvement during peer writing conferences: (a) strategy use during peer writing
conferences, (b) feelings toward peer writing conferences, and (c) leading a future peer writing conference. Figure 5 displays responses
from second grade students pertaining to the strategies or skills they felt they used while leading a peer writing conference.
Student Strategy Use

Other
8%
Questioning

Problem Solving
26%

Questioning
43%

Predicting
Reflecting
Problem Solving
Other

Reflecting
13%

Predicting
10%

Figure 5. Student Strategy Use.
The results indicated that 43% of students felt that they used questioning during the peer writing conference. All of the
strategies/skills listed in this graph were generated from second grade students after conducting a peer writing conference. Each of
these strategies or skills indicates student perception of metacognitive abilities. All students perceived that they were using some type
of metacognitive strategy or skill, as indicated from the graph.
Figure 6 reveals that 76% of the second grade students had positive feelings regarding the idea of leading a peer writing conference.
Feeling Toward Peer Writing Conferences

No Response
14%
Not Good
5%
Great

Okay
5%

Okay
Not Good
No Response
Great
76%

Figure 6. Feeling Toward Peer Writing Conferences.

© The Missouri Reader, 36 (1) p.77