Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

Rationale

Technical writing is a way of communicating the ideas in writing which

otherwise need to be presented orally. Technical writing skills have always been the

need of the time, as they are required for internal as well as external official

communication in both formal and informal manner. Moreover, they are the best way

to capture the attention of the readers by presenting information in effective manner

(Khalid et al., 2014).

In the United States, a survey by the Business Roundtable of 120 major

American corporations employing nearly 8 million people concludes that in today’s

workplace technical writing is a threshold skill for hiring and promotion among

salaried professionals. Survey results indicate that technical writing skills is a ticket to

professional opportunity, while writing skills are a figurative kiss of death. Estimates

based on the survey returns reveal that employers spend billions annually correcting

writing deficiencies. People who cannot write and communicate clearly will not be

hired and are unlikelyto last long enough to be considered for promotion (Fitzhugh,

2013).

In the Philippines, the technical writing proficiency of Filipino students is

continually declining over the years as shown in the low performance in national

assessment in their competency in the use of their technical writing skills. Students

have great difficulty in expressing their ideas in the classroom and in writing which

could also be attributed to the utter neglect of developing the writing competencies of
 2

the students. Classroom activities are neglected or are not enough to help the

students develop their writing competence. Students have writing problems in

expressing themselves systematically and logically This lack of skills as one of the

most common complaints students have when they encounter a particularly difficult

assignment may be an outcome of neglecting one’s studies for a considerable period

of time, poor education or something else (Aliweng, 2008).

In Davao City, in a study conducted by Carampil (2014) among selected

college students on technical writing skills, it was found out that there are many

students who are poor in technical writing as shown in their compositions, essays,

article writing which are glaringly manifested in poor clearly, consistency and

grammatically-error filled paragraphs.

The limited local studies and literatures regarding reading engagement and

technical writing skills had created a knowledge gap among local researchers and

readers. To be able to fill up the gap, the researcher was encouraged to conduct

such study. The researcher also believed that through this study, this can be utilized

as basis to improve the technical writing skills of students. This study tried to

determine the level of reading engagement and its significant relationship with

technical writing skills of students.

Research Objectives

This study was conducted to determine therelationship between reading

engagement and technical writing skills of students. Specifically, it sought answer the

following objectives:
 3

1. To describe the reading engagement of students in terms of:

1.1 behavioral engagement;

1.2 cognitive engagement ; and

1.3 emotional engagement.

2. To determine the technical writing skills of students in terms of:

2.1clarity;

2.2 conciseness;

2.3 accessible document design;

2.4audience recognition; and

2.5accuracy.

3. To determine the significance of the relationship between the reading

engagement and technical writing skills of students.

Hypothesis

Ho: There is no significant relationship between the reading engagement and

technical writing skills of students.

Literature Review

Presented in this section are the related literature that are relevant in the

present study taken from various sources such as books, magazines, newspapers,

journal and the internet.

 4

Reading Engagement

Guthrie and Wigfield (2010) proposed that reading engagement is a

multidimensional attribute including behavioral engagement (actively performing

academic learning tasks), cognitive engagement (using high-level strategiesto foster

deep learning), and emotional engagement (enjoying academic tasks and expressing

enthusiasm about learning). They proposed that engagement in reading is the joint

functioning of motivational processes and cognitive strategies during reading

comprehension. In this perspective, highly engaged readers are bothinternally

motivated and strategic, and less engaged readers show lower motivation and less

use ofstrategies for comprehending text.

Reading skills for children are critical for future academic and personal growth.

Reading engagement is an important component of a child’s ultimate

literacydevelopment. The level and amount of time that a child spends engaged in

literacy activities is an accurate predictor of his or her motivation to read including

gains in reading achievement (Wigfield, Guthrie, Perencevich, Taboada, Klauda,

Mcrae, & Barbosa, 2008). Factors influencing engagement include motivation

(Clarke, Power, Hoffman, Kelleher, & Novak, 2013), home environment (Arzubiaga,

Rueda, &Monzo, 2012), independent reading, and gains in reading achievement. It is

multidimensional and influenced by the cognitive and emotional engagement of the

reader (Wigfield, et al., 2008).

Wigfield, et al. (2008) found a strong correlation between reading engagement

and reading achievement when they studied the effects of Concept-Oriented Reading

Instruction on the reading outcomes of fourth grade children. The authors concluded
 5

that children’s reading engagement is enhanced when they are provided with

instruction in cognitive strategies associated with reading.

Children who use sophisticated strategies and enjoy literacy activities are considered

to be engaged readers. Consistently engaged readers actively seek appropriate

books and become excited about learning new material (Lutz, Guthrie, & Davis,

2006).

Marinak and Gambrell (2008) reported that children are motivated to read and

remain engaged in reading when rewarded with the opportunity to choose their own

books. Arzubiaga, et al., (2012) claimed that context within literacy activities was an

important factor crucial to reading engagement and literacy development. Other

factors reported include culture of the school, various intervention programs, and the

child’s home and classroom environment all influence reading achievement.

Researchers indicate that motivation is a top predictor of whether students will

engage with texts in meaningful ways. A reader's motivation can include the context

of the reading situation, choice in text selection, and reading of high-interest material.

Furthermore, because learning is a social activity, it is important for us to allow social

collaboration as part of our instructional practice. Numerous studies claim that peer

interactive learning is conducive and perhaps essential to cognitive development.

Findings from a large body of studies show that students learn more through peer

collaborative learning approaches compared with learning in isolation or teacher-

dominated instruction. Peer collaborative learning is an educational practice where

peers interact with one another to achieve learning goals (Morrison &Wlodarczyk,

2009).
 6

On the other hand, Ehrlich (2013) revealed that many factors involved in

achieving competence and engagement in early reading. For poor readers, word

recognition skills are critical. For good readers, other factors including metacognitive

skills and motivation are also important: “Basic word decoding and perceptual skills

are necessary in order to read; if a child lacks these cognitive skills, even the most

adaptive attribution and self-efficacy beliefs will not magically reveal the meaning

behind the text. Thus for poor readers, word decoding skill is highly related to

comprehension. ability. In contrast, for good readers who possess adequate

decoding skills, motivational variables such as perceived competence emerge as

influential factors determining reading performance.” In addition to predicting

immediate ability, poor word decoding skills are a good predictor of long-term reading

difficulties.

In addition, a good analogy for understanding reading engagement comes

from public speaking. Fluent public speakers embed in their voices those same

elements that are associated with reading fluency – accuracy in speech, appropriate

speed, and phrasing and expression. The speaker’s use of these aspects of fluency

facilitates the listener’s comprehension. Speaking in appropriate phrases,

emphasizing certain words, raising and lowering volume, and varying intonation help

the listener understand what the speaker is trying to communicate (Rasinski, 2014).

Behavioral Engagement.Behavioral engagement is direct involvement in a

set of activities and includes positive conduct, effort and persistence, and

participation in extracurricular activities (Guthrie &Wigfield, 2010). Students’

engagement in reading is enhanced when the contexts in which reading occurs foster
 7

it. There are a variety of instructional practices that foster students’ reading

engagement, and we discuss them below. We believe that engagement in reading is

crucial to the development of reading comprehension skills and reading achievement.

Behavioral engagement encompasses students’ effort, persistence,

participation, and compliance with school structures. In general, school-level changes

are typically focused on modifying students’ behavioral engagement. Achievement in

school is often included in the research as an outcome of students’ behavioral

engagement as measured by teacher or self-reports of students’ effort including

daily/weekly grades for classroom/lab participation and homework completion and

task persistence (Davis, Shalter-Bruening, &Andrzejewski, 2008).

Emotional Engagement.Emotional engagement covers both positive and

negative affective reactions such as interest, boredom, anxiety, frustration to

activities, as well as to the individuals with whom one does the activities (teachers,

peers). It also comprises identification with school (Guthrie &Wigfield, 2010).

Veltkamp (2013) conducted two studies to explore the relationship between

reading comprehension and emotional engagement through empathy. Participants’

empathy was assessed immediately before and after the experiment. Their levels of

emotional engagement were also measured immediately after the reading, and a

follow-up empathy level assessment was conducted a week afterward. In the second

study the researchers conducted the same assessments, with an added dimension.

In addition to measuring the participants’ levels of empathy and emotional

engagement, the researchers asked participants to rate their positive and negative

emotions after the reading. In both studies, they found that the fiction readers who
 8

were more emotionally engaged in the narrative became more empathetic over the

course of the week.

Cognitive Engagement.Cognitive engagement means willingness to exert the

mental effort needed to comprehend challenging concepts and accomplish difficult

tasks in different domains, as well as the use of self-regulatory and other strategies

to guide one’s cognitive efforts. It focused on students’ engagement in reading

activities and defined reading engagement as interacting with text in ways that are

both strategic and motivated (Guthrie &Wigfield, 2010).

Moreover,cognitive engagement is a form of instruction that challenges

students to draw upon basic skills to engage in higher level thinking.  Classroom

instruction that is cognitively engaged has a clear purpose and often involves multiple

skills within a single lesson and requires students to interact with the curriculum in a

deep and thoughtful manner.  In her article, "Teaching for Cognitive Engagement",

Solis states:  "A substantially engaged student is one who not only attends to the

built-in procedures of instruction but also interacts with the content of the lesson in a

deep and thoughtful manner (Solis, 2010).

The above readings emphasized the importance of reading engagement of

students that will eventually lead to the development of their behavioral, cognitive

and emotional engagement. Various authors also explained that when readers,

particularly students engage their behavior, cognitive and emotion while reading,

their comprehension on what they read also increases.

 9

Technical Writing Skills

Markel (2012) enumerated good technical writing skills which are based on

five elements: clarity, conciseness, accessible document design, audience

recognition and accuracy. Technical writing is performed by a technical writer and is

the process of writing and sharing information in a professional setting. A technical

writer’s main task is to convey information to another person or party in the most

clear and effective manner possible. The information that technical writers convey is

often complex, and it is one of their main tasks to analyze the information and

present it in a format that is easy to read and understand.

Moreover, a good technical writer needs strong writing and communication

skills. They do not only convey information through text, and must be proficient with

computers as well. Technical writing covers many genres and writing styles

depending on the information and audience. Technical documents are not solely

produced by technical writers. Almost anyone who works in a professional setting

produces technical documents of some variety (Crabbe, 2012).

Accurate information presented in effective and appealing manner is the key

to success. With increased awareness, people have started paying attention not only

to the information content but also to the way information is presented to them. As an

aim to discipline the field of technical writing, different writing styles and rules has

been devised, and it is the need to follow these rules to become successful as a

professional (Pont, 2012).

Technical writing is equally important for students studying in professional

institutions. No matter how much capable a student is in learning the technical

 10

content, but what to do of it if a student cannot communicate it effectively towards

their teachers and their employers in future. Good technical writing helps to achieve

job goals for today’s students. Being students, good writing skills will help them to

write effective dissertations that can be accepted without any major objection

(Gerson&Gerson, 2011)

Technical writing requires clarity of expression and therefore simplicity of

language. Technical writing is intent on expressing certain key concepts so that these

may be understood as easily as possibly by the intended readers, be they

programmers or users. Writing in a clear, concise manner makes not only

understanding the text easier for the reader, it also makes one’s life as a writer of

technical documentation easier (Spuida, 2002).

According to Tebeaux and Dragga (2010), good technical writing is concise,

focused, easy to understand, and free of errors. Technical writers focus on making

their documents as clear as possible, avoiding overly technical phrases and stylistic

choices like passive voice and nominalizations. Because technical documents are

used in real-world situations, it should always be explicitly clear what the subject

matter of a technical document is and what should be done with the presented

information. It would be disastrous if, for example, a technical writer’s instructions on

how to use a high-powered X-ray machine were difficult to decipher.

Furthermore, Markel (2012) cited that technical writing requires a writer to

extensively examine his or her audience. A technical writer needs to be aware of his

or her audience’s existing knowledge about the material he or she is discussing

because the knowledge base of the writer’s audience will determine the content and
 11

focus of a document. For example, an evaluation report discussing a scientific

study’s findings that is written to a group of highly skilled scientists will be very

differently constructed than one intended for the general public. Technical writers do

not have to be subject-matter experts (SMEs) themselves and generally collaborate

with SMEs to complete tasks that require more knowledge about a subject than they

possess.

Moreover, Martinez (2010) explained that technical writing must be accurate.

A technical writer, after analyzing his or her audience, knows what they're trying to

communicate. The goal from there is to convey the message in an accurate and

ethical manner. Physical, environmental, or financial repercussions could result if a

writer does this incorrectly. Knowing the audience is important to accuracy because

the language will be tailored according to what they understand about the subject at

hand. For example, instructions on how to correctly and safely build a bookshelf are

included when purchased. Those instructions are constructed so that anyone could

follow along, as well as accurate details as to where every fastener goes. If those

instructions were inaccurate, the bookshelf could be unstable and result in falling,

and possibly injure someone.

As stated by Bachani (2013), technical writing skills is slightly different from

speaking in term of communication context. Speaking is always intendedfor face-to-

face communication among the audience present, while technical writing is always

used by the writers to express and communicate their ideas to the readers who are

actually separated by both time and space distances. Therefore, it requires clearer

and more comprehensive message. In other words, when people communicate

 12

orally, they can use various types of prosodic features such as pitch, rhythm,

pauses that enable them to get feedbacks from the listeners. In contrast, those

features of speaking do not exist in writing because the communication context is

created by the words alone without having direct interaction between the writer and

the reader.

More so, the nature of technical writing can also be defined as both physical

and mental activity that is aimed to express and impress as stated by Nunan(2013). It

is categorized as the physical activity because a writer is required to be able to do

the act of committing words or ideas. As a mental work, the activities of writing focus

more on the act of inventing ideas, thinking about how to express and organize them

into clear statements and paragraphs that enable a reader in understanding the ideas

of the written work.

Clarity.Markell (2012) stated that it is essential that the technical writer

understands the reader's background and needs. Making the documentation too

technical can confuse the reader. The document is meaningless if the intended

audience does not understand what the writer wants to communicate. Writers who

are well aware of their audiences are in a position to give a solution to their problems.

The profession of technical writing demands simplicity of language and clarity of

expression. One must avoid unnecessary words that may put the readers in a

quandary. The written document must be clear and concise so that the text becomes

easier to grasp and understand.

Jeffrey (2011) stated that clarity in technical writing skills means the writing is

clear and precise. Good technical writing, to borrow a phrase from the young people,
 13

is totally clear and precise. Technical writing should be as clear as possible. If one is

not writing for a specialized audience, avoid jargon. Industry-specific terms or

acronyms might flow from your mind into the word processor, but did you always

know these terms? Imagine writing for readers with no exposure to the concepts

presented. Another issue of clarity in technical writing is the use of pronouns.

Inexplicably, technical writers love pronouns. They cause a great deal of confusion

for readers.

There are two forms of clarity in technical writing: organizational and textual.

Organizational clarity is primary to the success of any technical document and

deserves the same attention as the content. The challenge is to be clear while

complying with external mandates placed on technical documents. One thing to

remember is that most mandates are minimum content standards; if clarity requires a

few more words or illustrations, then add them. Clarity means you educate readers

and help refine their understandings of information.

A clear organization helps make a document usable for readers. Technical

writing tends to be organized into small chunks of information. In a“chunky”

document chapters have sections, sections have subsections, and “marginalia” is

common. The elements of clear organization include: headings, subheadings, and

other clear typographical cues; tables of content, lists of figures, indices, and other

navigational elements; and “chunked” text in short, easy to skim paragraphs.

Conciseness.Kurtus (2010) stated that one of the most important and difficult

parts of technical documentation concerns writing in a concise manner. Technical

writing is different than writing fiction or magazine articles, where a mood may be set
 14

or in some cases where space must be filled. Effective documentation is important for

a business to succeed. This includes both internal documents and those reaching the

customers. Care must be taken in technical writing to avoid unnecessary or non-

value-added material in the documentation.

Many writers have a love of words and consider themselves artists. Even

among professional technical writers, there are many who are working on a

manuscript or screenplay in their spare time. In much fiction and nonfiction writing,

words not only convey information, but they are also used to present emotions and

mood. Often descriptions are used to make the reader feel like he or she is actually

in the scene. Words are used as artistic tools in this type of writing.

This means the document has to be organized as useful chunks of information

that can be used immediately. Long descriptions, literary metaphors, and other

attempts to write “literature” frustrate readers of technical documents. There are

exceptions when a document section can be longer and more detailed, but by

organizing your document for ease of navigation readers can selectively read for

depth.

Accessible Document Design.As stated by Waller (2014), document design

and layout are also very important components of technical writing. Technical writers

spend much time ensuring their documents are laid out in a fashion that makes

readability easy, because a poorly designed document hampers a reader’s

comprehension. Technical document design stresses proper usage of document

design choices like bullet points, font-size, and bold text. Images, diagrams, and

videos are also commonly employed by technical writers because these media can
 15

often convey complex information, like a company’s annual earnings or a product’s

design features, far more efficiently than text.

Henry (2007) stated that when designing documentation, technical writers

have five aims to keep constantly in mind. These goals are: make a good impression;

documentation must look professional and create a positive image of the product and

the company; clearly define information structure; the documents must be easily

navigable and follow a logical and reasonable order; give the readers the information

they need. Documentation is sharing knowledge, not hiding it, documents must be

designed to make finding information easy which help readers understand.

Documents must communicate clearly and accurately to help readers remember.

Well designed documents make the information easy to remember by using visual

prompts and elements.

Audience Recognition.The audience of a technical report, or any piece of

writing for that matter is the intended or potential reader or readers. For most

technical writers, this is the most important consideration in planning, writing, and

reviewing a document. You "adapt" your writing to meet the needs, interests, and

background of the readers who will be reading your writing. The principle seems

absurdly simple and obvious. It's much the same as telling someone, "Talk so the

person in front of you can understand what you're saying." It's like saying, "Don't talk

rocket science to your six-year-old." Do we need a course in that? Doesn't seem like

it. But, in fact, lack of audience analysis and adaptation is one of the root causes of

most of the problems you find in professional, technical documents, particularly

instructions where it surfaces most glaringly (Rutter, 2006).

 16

McMurrey (2010) revealed that the common division of audiences into

categories is as follows: Experts: These are the people who know the theory and the

product inside and out. They designed it, they tested it, they know everything about it.

Often, they have advanced degrees and operate in academic settings or in research

and development areas of the government and technology worlds; Technicians:

These are the people who build, operate, maintain, and repair the stuff that the

experts design and theorize about. Theirs is a highly technical knowledge as well, but

of a more practical nature; Executives: These are the people who make business,

economic, administrative, legal, governmental, political decisions on the stuff that the

experts and technicians work with; and Nonspecialists: These readers have the least

technical knowledge of all. Their interest may be as practical as technicians', but in a

different way. They want to use the new product to accomplish their tasks; they want

to understand the new power technology enough to know whether to vote for or

against it in the upcoming bond election. Or, they may just be curious about a

specific technical matter and want to learn about it, but for no specific, practical

reason.

Accuracy.Markell (2012) cited thataccuracy is an important characteristic of

any technical document. A slight mistake can have grave consequences. For

instance, if you forget to mention some important features of a new mobile phone,

the customers may think that there is nothing special in that phone and will not prefer

to buy it. Effective communication requires quality content and language that is

accurate and readable. Technical writing does not mean that you translate
 17

information unquestioningly. In this profession, one must know for whom the

document is being written and whether it is accurate.

In addition, Buzzle (2011) explained that Accuracy, which is the careful

conforming to truth or fact, has three main aspects: Document accuracy refers to the

proper coverage of your topics in appropriate detail. Often an accurate document

needs to focus clearly on a problem. Document accuracy is generally cultivated by a

clear problem statement and by a preliminary outline; Stylistic accuracy concerns the

careful use of language to express meaning. Accurate language requires the careful

use of paragraph and sentence structure and word choice to describe and analyze

your topics effectively. Stylistic accuracy is also a matter of using words precisely;

and Technical accuracy requires stylistic accuracy but is not based solely on it.

Technical accuracy depends on the writer's conceptual mastery of the subject and its

vocabulary, as well as on his or her ability to analyze and shape data with a minimum

of distortion. In science and technology, enormous creative energy is given to

mastering this technical aspect of subject development.

The above readings discussed the elements and importance of technical

writing. Various authors emphasized that in order to have excellent technical writing

skills and to be able to convey to the readers the written article, it must follow certain

elements such as clarity, conciseness, accessible document design, audience

recognition and accuracy.

Relationship Between Reading Engagement and Technical Writing Skills of

Students
 18

The relationship between reading engagement and technical writing skills has

been explained by Petty (2013) that writing and reading have long been considered

to be related activities. Along with listening and speaking, they have been treated by

educators as essential components of the language arts. It indicated that reading

engagement and technical writing development are characterized by gradually more

sophisticated rule-governed representations, and that the learner is an active

problem-solver who is influenced by background knowledge, text, and context. A

concomitant and eventually equally influential body of work, primarily from a

sociolinguistic, socio-cultural, and socio-historical perspective permitted

consideration of ways in which life's experiences as well as the uses and functions of

writing and reading affect not only the acts of writing and reading, but how they

relate.

It was also confirmed by the study of Brown and Bellugi (2014) at the Center

for Cognitive Studies at Harvard wherein technical writing skills and reading

engagement were regarded as related language processes. In the longitudinal study

of students' reading and writing development across 4th, 6th, and 9th grades,

indicated strong relationships between reading and writing as measured by test

scores. It was reported that students who wrote well also read well, and that the

converse was true. Further, these relationships become even more pronounced

across the school grades.

Furthermore, in 2013, Stotsky published a review of correlational and

experimental studies that investigated reading engagement and technical writing

relationships. Her much cited synthesis spans approximately fifty years from the
 19

beginning of the 1960's to 2011. Correlational studies to that time showed that better

writers tend to be better readers of their own writing as well as of other reading

material, that better writers tend to read more than poorer writers, and that better

readers tend to produce more syntactically mature writing than poorer readers. With

regard to instruction she reported, studies that sought to improve writing by providing

reading experiences in place of grammar study or additional writing practice found

that these experiences were as beneficial as, or more beneficial than, grammar study

or extra writing practice.

Theoretical Framework

Thestudy is based on the engagement model of reading comprehension

development of Guthrie and Wigfield (2010) who proposes that engagement

inreading is the joint functioning of motivational processes and cognitive strategies

during readingcomprehension. In this perspective, highly engaged readers are

bothinternally motivated and strategic, and less engaged readers show lower

motivation and less use ofstrategies for comprehending text. Consistent with this

perspective, Fredricks, Blumenfeld, and Paris(2014) proposed that engagement is a

multidimensional attribute including behavioral engagement(actively performing

academic learning tasks), cognitive engagement (using high-level strategiesto foster

deep learning), and emotional engagement (enjoying academic tasks and expressing

enthusiasm about learning).

Moreover, this study is also anchored on the proposition of Crabbe (2012)

which stated that a good technical writer needs strong writing and communication
 20

skills. They do not only convey information through text, and must be proficient with

computers as well. Technical writing covers many genres and writing styles

depending on the information and audience. Technical documents are not solely

produced by technical writers. Almost anyone who works in a professional setting

produces technical documents of some variety.

Conceptual Framework

Figure 1 shows the conceptual paradigm of the study. The X variable is the

reading engagement of students which is defined as interacting with text in ways that

are both strategic and motivated (Guthrie &Wigfield, 2010). Reading engagement is

composed of behavioral, emotional and cognitive engagement. Behavioral

engagement refers to the direct involvement and participation in extra-curricular

activities. Emotional engagement covers both positive and negative reactions to

activities. Cognitive engagement refers to the willingness to exert the mental effort

needed to comprehend challenging concepts.

The Y variable is technical skills which refer to the skills of a technical writer

and is the process of writing and sharing information in a professional setting (Markel

(2012). Good technical writing skills which are based on five elements: clarity,

conciseness, accessible document design, audience recognition and accuracy.

Clarity means that the written document should be clear and concise so that the text

becomes easier to grasp and understand. Conciseness means document must be

organized as useful chunks of information. Accessible document design refers to the

documents that should communicate clearly and accurately to help readers

 21

remember. Audience recognition means that writer should recognize any piece of

writing for that matter is the intended or potential readers. Accuracy refers to careful

conforming to the truth or fact of what is being written.

Presented in Figure 1 is the conceptual paradigm showing the variables of the

study. The double-headed arrow represents the relationship between reading

engagement and technical writing skills of students. Moreover, the indicators of

variable X (reading engagement) such as behavioral, cognitive, and emotional

engagements are correlated to the indicators under variable Y (technical writing

skills) such as clarity, conciseness, accessible document design, audience

recognition and accuracy.

 22

Figure 1

Conceptual Paradigm

X Y

READING ENGAGEMENT
TECHNICAL WRITING
 Behavioral SKILLS
engagement
 Clarity
 Cognitive  Conciseness
engagement  Accessible
document design
 Emotional  Audience
engagement recognition
 Accuracy


 23

Significance of the Study

The valuable output of the study is beneficial to the following concerns:

The input from this study would provide school administrators of data and

information about the reading engagement and technical writing skills of students,

thus they will make necessary programs to address the problem. In addition, the

results from this study would provideteachers with informationin evaluating the

reading engagement and also their level of technical writing skills, thus formulate

necessary methodologies to effectively teach these students to be effective technical

writers. Further, the data and information from this study would widen the knowledge

of the students which can be used as their guide when they practice their chosen

profession. They would also be able to comprehend or understand the importance of

reading engagement and technical writing skills in the profession. Lastly, future

researcherswould utilize the findings and literatures from this study that they could

use as their baseline data for their future studies and research.

Definition of Terms

For the better understanding of this study, some of the terms and variables are

defined below:

Reading Engagement.It is defined as interacting with text in ways that are

both strategic and motivated” (Guthrie &Wigfield, 2000). In this study, it refers to the
 24

process of reading comprehension of students towards the content of what he / she

is reading.

Technical Writing Skills.It refers to the skills ofa technical writer and is the

process of writing and sharing information in a professional setting (Markel (2012).

Heenumerated good technical writing skills which are based on five elements: clarity,

conciseness, accessible document design, audience recognition and accuracy.

 25

Chapter 2

METHOD

Presented in this chapter are the discussions on the research design, the

procedure in conducting and identifying the respondents, the instrument used and

the statistical tools employed.

Research Design

This study used quantitative non-experimental research design utilizing

descriptive-correlational technique. This method is more appropriate because it uses

the survey in collecting data from a wide selection by selecting a representative

sample of a large population. In descriptive-correlational research, the researcher

measures the two variables of interest with little or no attempt to control extraneous

variables and then assesses the relationship between them (Rosehan, 2006). In

addition, Krathwohl (2003) stated that there are three main purposes of descriptive-

correlational research method which is: to describe, explain, and validate findings.

Polit and Hungler (2009) added that descriptive-correlational research refers to

inductive, holistic, subjective and process-oriented methods used to understand,

interpret, describe and develop a theory on a phenomena or setting, while Deci

(2005) stated that it is a systematic, subjective approach used to describe life

 26

experiences and give them meaning which mostly associated with words, language

and experiences and also measurements, statistics and numerical figures.

Research Locale

The research study was conducted in St. John Paul II College of Davao. The

college is composed of seven different departments, also called Colleges; the

College of Business Administration, College of Teacher Education, College of

Information and Communications Technology, College of Nursing, College of

Engineering, College of Hospitality Management and College of Criminology.

Figure 2.Map of St. John Paul II College of Davao

``

Population and Sample

 27

The respondents of this study were one hundred (100)randomly selected

students of St. John Paul II College of Davao who were officially enrolled during the

first semester of the Academic Year 2016-2017. The research subjects were given a

survey questionnaire during the conduct of the study. Purposive sampling method

was employed in the study.

Frequency Distribution of Respondents

Year level No. of Respondents Percentage

4th Year 50 50%
5th Year 50 50%
Total 100 100%

Research Instrument

The researcher formulated a researcher-made survey questionnaire. During

the formulation of the research instrument, he was assisted by the thesis adviser.

The survey questionnaire was divided into two (2) parts. The survey questionnaire

consisted of five (5) questions for each indicator per variable. Before the

administration of the survey questionnaire, it underwent standard validation

procedures that was done by experts from the faculty of College of Teacher

Education of St. John Paul II College of Davao.

 28

In evaluating the level of reading engagement and technical writing skills, the

following scale were used.

Range of Descriptive
Interpretation
Means Rating

The item mentioned in reading engagement

4.51 – 5.00 Very High and technical writing skills is always
manifested.

The item mentioned in reading engagement

3.51 – 4.50 High and technical writing skills is oftentimes
manifested.

The item mentioned in reading engagement

2.51 – 3.50 Moderate and technical writing skills is sometimes
manifested.

The item mentioned in reading engagement

1.51 – 2.50 Low and technical writing skills is seldom
manifested.

1.00 – 1.50 Very Low

 29

The item mentioned in reading engagement

and technical writing skills is never
manifested.

Data Collection

The following steps were followed in the conduct of the study:

The researcher asked permission, through a formal letter duly noted by the

thesis adviser, to the Dean of the College of Teacher Education of St. John Paul II

College of Davao, in conducting the study. After getting permission from the College

Dean, the researcher distributed the survey questionnaire to the research

respondents. The researcher retrieved the survey questionnaires, collated and

tabulated all the data that was subjected to statistical analysis with the guidance of

the statistician. Then the results were analyzed and interpreted based on the

statement of the problem of the study.

Statistical Tools

The following statistical tools were used in the computation of data and was

tested at 0.05 level of significance.

Mean was used in determining the level of reading engagement and technical

writing skills of students.

Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficient (Pearson-r)was used to

determine the significant relationship between the level of reading engagement and

technical writing skills of students.

 30

Chapter 3

RESULTS

Introduced in this chapter were the results of reading engagement and

technical writing skills of students. The responses of the respondent of the study

were critically analyzed and interpreted to substantiate the utility of value of the study

in favor to the beneficiaries posed earlier.

Level of the Reading Engagement of Students

The reading engagement was assessed based on the students of St. John

Paul II College of Davao. Critical analysis of the data was considered to come up

with a reliable results and findings.

Table 1

Summary on the Level of Reading Engagement of Students

Indicators Mean Descriptive

Equivalent
Behavioral Engagement 3.91 High
Cognitive Engagement 3.99 High
Emotional Engagement 3.93 High
Overall 3.94 High

Table 1 shows the summary on the level of reading engagement with the

following sub-indicators: behavioral engagement; cognitive engagement; and

emotional engagement with an overall mean of 3.94 which is described as high. This

means that the reading engagement of students is oftentimes manifested.

 31

It was indicated from the data that the indicators with the highest mean rating

of 3.99 or qualitatively described as high is cognitive engagement; followed by 3.93

which is emotional engagement and the indicator with the lowest mean rating of 3.91

is behavioral engagement.

Level of Technical Writing Skills of Students

The level of technical writing skills of students was evaluated based on clarity,

conciseness, accessible document design, audience recognition and accuracy. On

the basis of evaluation, the researcher clarified the content of the research tool to the

students and explained to them the purpose of study.

Table 2

Summary on the Level of Technical Writing Skills of Students

Indicator Mean Descriptive

Equivalent
Clarity 3.91 High
Conciseness 3.93 High
Accessible Document Design 3.92 High
Audience Recognition 4.00 High
Accuracy 3.96 High
Overall 3.96 High

Table 2 shows the summary on the level of technical writing skills of students

with the following sub-indicators: clarity; conciseness; accessible document design;

audience recognition and accuracy with an overall mean rating of 3.96 which is

described as high. This means that the technical writing skills of students are

oftentimes manifested.

It was indicated from the data that the indicators with the highest mean rating

of 4.00 or qualitatively described as high is audience recognition; followed by 3.96

 32

which is accuracy; 3.93 conciseness; 3.92 accessible document design and the

indicator with the lowest mean rating of 3.91 is clarity.

Significance on the Relationship between Reading Engagement and Technical

Writing Skills of Students

The correlation between reading engagement and technical writing skills of

students was carefully analyzed and interpreted to dissect a credible finding and

result. These findings and results underwent thorough analysis to provide meaningful

advantage to the recipients of the study.

Table 3

Significance on the Relationship between Reading Engagement and Technical

Writing Skills of Students

Decision on
Technical Writing Skills of Students
Overall Ho
Reading
Accessible
Engagement Clarity Conciseness Document
Audience
Accuracy
Recognition
Design
Reject
.485 .483 .553 .512 .551 .598 (Significant)
Behavioral
.000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
Engagement
Reject
Cognitive .471 .588 .641 .543 .639 .666 (Significant
Engagement .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

Reject
Emotional .609 .611 .641 .583 .524 .687 (Significant
Engagement .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

Reject
.636 .680 .740 .662 .686 .787
Overall (Significant
.000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
Significant@.05 Level of significance
Exhibited in Table 3 is the correlation between reading engagement and

technical writing skills of students with an overall computed r-value of .787 and p-
 33

value of .000 lesser than .05 level of significance set in this study. This leads to the

rejection of the null hypothesis. It is stated therefore that there is significant

relationship between reading engagement and technical writing skills of students.

This emphasizes that the reading engagement is correlated to the technical writing

skills of students.

It could be viewed from the data that the correlation with significant

relationship between indicators of reading engagement and technical writing skills of

students are as follows:

Behavioral engagement attained a computed r-value of .598 and p-value of .

000 (Significant). Cognitive engagementattained a computed r-value of .666 and p-

value of .000 (Significant). Similarly, emotional engagementattained a computed r-

value of .687 and p-value of .000 (Significant). On the other hand, clarity attained a

computed r-value of .636 and p-value of .000 (Significant). Conciseness attained a

computed r-value of .680 and p-value of .000 (Significant). Accessible document

design attained a computed r-value of .740 and p-value of .000 (Significant).

Audience recognition attained a computed r-value of .662 and p-value of .000

(Significant). Accuracy attained a computed r-value of .686 and p-value of .000

(Significant).

Similarly, behavioral engagement is correlated to clarity with a computed r-

value of .485 and p-value of .000 (Significant). Behavioral engagement is also

correlated to conciseness with a computed r-value of .483 and p-value of .000

(Significant).Behavioral engagement is also correlated to accessible document

design with a computed r-value of .553 and p-value of .000 (Significant).Behavioral

 34

engagement is also correlated to audience recognition with a computed r-value of .

512 and p-value of .000 (Significant).And, behavioral engagement is correlated to

accuracy with a computed r-value of .551 and p-value of .000 (Significant).

In like manner, cognitive engagement is correlated to clarity with a computed

r-value of .471 and p-value of .000 (Significant). Cognitive engagement is also

correlated to conciseness with a computed r-value of .588 and p-value of .000

(Significant).Cognitive engagement is also correlated to accessible document design

with a computed r-value of .641 and p-value of .000 (Significant).Cognitive

engagement is also correlated to audience recognition with a computed r-value of .

543 and p-value of .000 (Significant).And, cognitive engagement is correlated to

accuracy with a computed r-value of .639 and p-value of .000 (Significant).

Moreover, emotional engagement is correlated to clarity with a computed r-

value of .609 and p-value of .000 (Significant). Emotional engagement is also

correlated to conciseness with a computed r-value of .611 and p-value of .000

(Significant).Emotional engagement is also correlated to accessible document design

with a computed r-value of .641 and p-value of .000 (Significant).Emotional

engagement is also correlated to audience recognition with a computed r-value of .

583 and p-value of .000 (Significant).And, emotional engagement is correlated to

accuracy with a computed r-value of .524 and p-value of .000 (Significant).

Chapter 4

DISCUSSION
 35

The discussion of Chapter 4 is outlined according to the presentation of the

analysis and interpretation of data found in Chapter 3. Likewise, conclusions and

recommendations were formulated for consideration.

Level of Reading Engagement

Findings revealed that the level of reading engagement of students is high,

which means that it is oftentimes shown or manifested by the students through

behavioral, cognitive and emotional engagements. This means that for students to be

able to develop their reading engagement, they need to internalize themselves on

what they are reading. This can be made by actively involving the brain to

comprehend what he / she reads, using different strategies that may help develop his

/ her reading speed and comprehension and his / her motivation to learn and

comprehend what he / she reads. Moreover, reading engagement means

internalizing or putting oneself on the situation of what one reads.

The high level of reading engagement of students is allied to the viewpoint of

Fredricks, Blumenfeld, and Paris (2005) that reading engagement is a

multidimensional attribute including behavioral engagement (actively performing

academic learning tasks), cognitive engagement (using high-level strategies to foster

deep learning), and emotional engagement (enjoying academic tasks and expressing

enthusiasm about learning).

The high level of reading engagement of students is also in line with the model
 36

in reading engagement development of Guthrie and Wigfield (2010) who proposes

that engagement in reading is the joint functioning of motivational processes and

cognitive strategies during reading comprehension. In this perspective, highly

engaged readers are both internally motivated and strategic, and less engaged

readers show lower motivation and less use of strategies for comprehending text.

Moreover, the findings is also supported by the idea of Wigfield, Guthrie,

Perencevich, Taboada, Klauda, Mcrae, and Barbosa (2008) that reading skills for

children are critical for future academic and personal growth in which reading

engagement is an important component of a child’s ultimate literacy development.

The level and amount of time that a child spends engaged in literacy activities is an

accurate predictor of his or her motivation to read including gains in reading

achievement.

The high level of reading engagement of students which was oftentimes

manifested through their behavioral engagement is supported by the idea ofDavis,

Shalter-Bruening, andAndrzejewski(2008) that behavioral engagement encompasses

students’ effort, persistence, participation, and compliance with school structures. In

general, school-level changes are typically focused on modifying students’ behavioral

engagement. Achievement in school is often included in the research as an outcome

of students’ behavioral engagement as measured by teacher or self-reports of

students’ effort including daily/weekly grades for classroom/lab participation and

homework completion and task persistence.

Similarly, the high level of reading engagement of students which was

oftentimes manifested through cognitive engagement is supported by the idea of

 37

Solis (2010) in which she defined cognitive engagement as a form of instruction that

challenges students to draw upon basic skills to engage in higher level thinking.  

Classroom instruction that is cognitively engaged has a clear purpose and often

involves multiple skills within a single lesson and requires students to interact with

the curriculum in a deep and thoughtful manner.  In her article, "Teaching for

Cognitive Engagement", she states:  "A substantially engaged student is one who not

only attends to the built-in procedures of instruction but also interacts with the content

of the lesson in a deep and thoughtful manner.

In addition, the high level of reading engagement of students which was

oftentimes manifested through emotional engagementconformed to the study of

Veltkamp (2013) in which he conducted two studies to explore the relationship

between reading engagement and emotional engagement through empathy.

Participants’ empathy was assessed immediately before and after the experiment.

Their levels of emotional engagement were also measured immediately after the

reading, and a follow-up empathy level assessment was conducted a week

afterward. In the second study the researchers conducted the same assessments,

with an added dimension. In addition to measuring the participants’ levels of empathy

and emotional engagement, the researchers asked participants to rate their positive

and negative emotions after the reading. In both studies, he found that the fiction

readers who were more emotionally engaged in the narrative became more

empathetic over the course of the week.

Level of Technical Writing Skills of Students

 38

Findings revealed that the level of technical writing skills of students is high,

which is oftentimes shown or manifested by the students through clarity,

conciseness, accessible document design, audience recognition and accuracy.

Based from the data gathered by the researcher, students manifested high level of

skills when it comes to technical writing and they have shown it when they write

essays, compositions, term papers or reports. This means that when they write

something, the message that they want to convey is clear, organized, accurate and

they know who are their readers, thus they chose words or paragraphs for the

readers to understand it.

The high level of technical writing skills of studentsis in parallel to the idea of

Markel (2012) which enumerated good technical writing skills which are based on five

elements: clarity, conciseness, accessible document design, audience recognition

and accuracy. Technical writing is performed by a technical writer and is the process

of writing and sharing information in a professional setting.

Moreover, the findings is also supported by Crabbe (2012) that a good

technical writer needs strong writing and communication skills. They do not only

convey information through text, and must be proficient with computers as well.

Technical writing covers many genres and writing styles depending on the

information and audience.

In addition, the findings also conformed to the idea of Tebeaux and Dragga

(2010) that good technical writing is concise, focused, easy to understand, and free

of errors. Technical writers focus on making their documents as clear as possible,

avoiding overly technical phrases and stylistic choices like passive voice and
 39

nominalizations. Because technical documents are used in real-world situations, it

should always be explicitly clear what the subject matter of a technical document is

and what should be done with the presented information.

The high level of technical writing skills of students which was oftentimes

manifested through clarity is allied to the idea ofJeffrey (2011) which stated that

clarity in technical writing skills means the writing is clear and precise. Good technical

writing, to borrow a phrase from the young people, is totally clear and precise.

Technical writing should be as clear as possible. If one is not writing for a specialized

audience, avoid jargon.

Also, the high level of technical writing skills of students which was oftentimes

manifested through conciseness is supported by Kurtus (2010) which stated that one

of the most important and difficult parts of technical documentation concerns writing

in a concise manner. Technical writing is different than writing fiction or magazine

articles, where a mood may be set or in some cases where space must be filled.

Effective documentation is important for a business to succeed.

Similarly, the high level of technical writing skills of students which was

oftentimes manifested through accessible document design is in parallel to the idea

of Waller (2014) that document design and layout are also very important

components of technical writing. Technical writers spend much time ensuring their

documents are laid out in a fashion that makes readability easy, because a poorly

designed document hampers a reader’s comprehension.

Moreover, the high level of technical writing skills of students which was

oftentimes manifested through audience recognition is in parallel to the idea of Rutter

 40

(2006) that the audience of a technical report, or any piece of writing for that matter is

the intended or potential reader or readers. For most technical writers, this is the

most important consideration in planning, writing, and reviewing a document.

Furthermore, the high level of technical writing skills of students which was

oftentimes manifested through accuracy is in parallel to the idea of Markell (2012)

which cited thataccuracy is an important characteristic of any technical document. A

slight mistake can have grave consequences. Effective communication requires

quality content and language that is accurate and readable. Technical writing does

not mean that one can translate information unquestioningly. In this profession, he or

she must know for whom the document is being written and whether it is accurate.

Correlation Between Variables

Reading engagement has significant bearing to technical writing skills of

students. The correlation between variables agreed to the engagement model of

reading comprehension development of Guthrie and Wigfield (2010) who proposes

that engagement in reading is the joint functioning of motivational processes and

cognitive strategies during reading comprehension. In this perspective, highly

engaged readers are both internally motivated and strategic, and less engaged

readers show lower motivation and less use of strategies for comprehending text.

Moreover, the relationship between the two variables also conformed to the

proposition of Crabbe (2012) which stated that a good technical writer needs strong

writing and communication skills. They do not only convey information through text,

and must be proficient with computers as well. Technical writing covers many genres
 41

and writing styles depending on the information and audience. Technical documents

are not solely produced by technical writers. Almost anyone who works in a

professional setting produces technical documents of some variety.

Conclusions

The aforementioned results and findings are the baseline data in the

formulation of the following conclusions: The level of reading engagement of students

is high. This means that the reading engagement of the respondents is oftentimes

manifested through behavioral, cognitive and emotional engagements.Consequently,

the level of technical writing skills of the respondents is also high. This means that

the technical writing skills of students isoftentimes manifested through clarity,

conciseness, accessible document design, audience recognition and accuracy. In

addition, there is significant relationship between reading engagement and technical

writing skills of students.

Recommendations

Based on the findings and conclusions, the following recommendations are

crafted for consideration of the beneficiaries of this study:

School administrators may introduce programs or activities that will improve or

enhance the reading engagement of the students by conducting reading skills

enhancement training and encouraging them to join it. They may also enhance the

reading engagement of students by providing more books in the library, particularly

topics that will increase the interest of the students such as current events, world

history, geography, among others. Moreover, they may also conduct contests or
 42

competitions in technical writing such as short story or narrative writings, essays,

articles, etc. Through this, students will be able to know the techniques of excellent

technical writing. School administrators may also encourage students to make

essays, short stories, and other personal compositions that can or may be published

in the school journal. This is to purposively improve their technical writing skills.

Moreover, teachers / instructors may incorporate classroom activities that can

enhance the reading engagement of their students. They may conduct group reading

activities and speed reading competitions, and discussing to the class what they

read. During the said activities, they may instruct students to strictly observe the

elements of technical writing such as clarity, conciseness, etc. They may also apply

“reward system” to those who will excel in the competition to encourage students to

write and be good technical writers in the future. Furthermore, future researchers

may utilize the data and information from this study to further conduct research about

reading engagement and technical writing, particularly variables not discussed in this

study. Future researchers may also discussed reading engagement and technical

skills writing of high school and elementary students in order to come up with a

comparative study between them and those of college students.

REFERENCES
 43

Aliweng, D. (2008). Writing proficiency level of freshmen students at Baguio School

of Business Technology (BSBT) College.Unpublished Master’s Thesis,
Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet.

Arzubiaga, Rueda, &Monzo (2012).Independent Reading. Linguistic Diversity and

Reading in American Society. In R. Barr, M.L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P.D.
Pearson (Eds.) Handbook of Reading Research, Vol. 2. NY: Longman. Pp. 97-
119.

Bachani, A. (2013). Conciseness is Key to Good Technical Documentation.

Retrieved from www.school-for-champions.com › Writing › Technical Writing

Brown, RW &Bellugi, U. (2014).Three processes in the child's acquisition of syntax.

Harvard Educational Review, 34, 133-151.

Buzzle, E. (2011). Characteristics of Technical Writing - Buzzle (2011)

www.buzzle.com/articles/characteristics-of-technical-writing.html

Carampil, E. (2014). Technical writing skills of college students.Unpublished

thesis.Retrieved June 11, 2016.

Clarke, Power, Hoffman, Kelleher, & Novak (2013).Home environment. Against our
best interest: The attempt to sabotage bilingual education. In J. Crawford (Ed.)
Language Loyalties: A Source Book on the Official; English Controversy.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 648-685.

Crabbe, S. (2012). “Constructing a Contextual History of English Language Technical

Writing".University of Portsmouth. Pg. 3

Davis, A., Shalter-Bruening, W. & Andrzejewski, J. (2008). Behavioral engagement.

Instructional Strategies That Encourage Students' Engagement With Texts.
The Reading Teacher, 63(2), 110-118.

Deci, S. (2005).Statistics and research design. 7th Edition.Retrieved June 29, 2015
from www.amazon.com.

Ehrlich, D. (2013). Explorations in developmental spelling: Foundations for learning

and teaching phonics, spelling, and vocabulary. The Reading Teacher, 52(3),
222–242.

Fitzhugh, W. (2013).New Study: Pervasively Poor Writing is Bad for a Career and
Business. Publisher of The Concord Review.education-curriculum-reform-
government-schools.org/.../new-study-pe
 44

Fredricks, A., Blumenfeld, R.R. & Paris, T.(2014). Multidimensional Attribute of

Reading Engagement. Handbook of Reading Research, Vol. 2. NY: Longman.
Pp. 97-119.

Gerson, J. (2013). Writing That Works: A Teacher’s Guide toTechnical

WritingJohnson County Community College

Gerson, S.J. &Gerson, S.M. (2011)“An Introduction to Technical Writing”, in

Technical Writing: Process and Product, 5th ed., ch.1, pp. 1-8.

Guthrie, A. &Wigfield, F. (2010).Reading engagement.Motivating students to behave

in socially competent ways. Theory Into Practice, 42, 319–326.

Henry, S. (2007). Just Ask: Integrating Accessibility Throughout Design. ET\Lawton.

Jeffrey, D. (2011) Episodic and Semantic Memory. In E. Tulving& W. Donaldson

(Eds.), Organization of Memory. (p. 382-404). New York: Academic Press.

Khalid, M., Tebeaux, E. & Dragga, S. (2014). The Essentials of Technical Writing.
Oxford University Press, 2010.Pg. 7.

Krathwohl, J. (2003). The Practice of Statistics, 3rd Ed. Freeman. ISBN 978-0-7167-

7309-2.

Kurtus, R. (2012). Conciseness is Key to Good Technical Documentation. Retrieved

from www.school-for-champions.com › Writing › Technical Writing

McMurrey, D. (2010). Audience Analysis.Just who are these guys?Online Technical

Writing: Audience Analysis - PrismNet. Retrieved from
https://www.prismnet.com/~hcexres/textbook/aud.html

Marinak, E. &Gambrell, J. (2008) Children are motivated to read. Linking Written

Language to Cognitive Development: Reading, Writing, and Concrete
Operations. Research in the Teaching of English, 28(1), 89-109.

Martinez, D. (2010). "Technical Writing: A Comprehensive Resource of Technical

Writers at All Levels."

Morrison, V., &Wlodarczyk, L. (2009).Revisiting Read-Aloud: Instructional Strategies

That Encourage Students' Engagement With Texts. The Reading Teacher,
63(2), 110-118.

Markel, M. (2012).Technical Communication 10th Edition.Bedford/St. Martins, 2012.

Pg. 12-14.
 45

Nunan, T. (2013). Writing That Works: A Teacher’s Guide toTechnical Writing

Johnson County Community College

Petty, W. (2013). Relationship Between Reading and Writing Skills. Retrieved from
https://www.prismnet.com/~hcexres/textbook/aud.html

Polit, F. &Hungler, W. (2009).Research methods and basic statistics.Phoenix

Publishing Co. 2nd ed. p. 3.

Pont, S. (2012) “Digital Dares Us to Dream”, in Digital State, ch.10, pp. 133-143.

Rasinski, T. V. (2014). The fluent reader: Oral reading strategies for building word
recognition, fluency, and comprehension. New York: Scholastic.

Rosehan, L. (2006). Interdependence, interaction and relationships.Annual Review of

Psychology, 54, 351-375. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145059

Rutter, A. (2006).An Analysis and Comparison of Theoretical Models of the Reading-

Writing Relationship. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, (2), 116-123.

Solis, A. (2010). Teaching for Cognitive Engagement.Materializing the Promise of

Sheltered Instruction

Spuida, B. (2002) Technical Notes, general Series. Technical Writing made

easiewww.icsharpcode.net/technotes/technicalwriting20020325.

Stotsky, F. (2013). Writing and Reading in the Elementary Grades: Developmental

Trends Among Low SES Children. Language Arts, 60(5), 617-626.

Tebeaux, E. &Dragga, S. (2010). The Essentials of Technical Communication.Oxford

University Press, 2010.Pg. 7.

Veltkamp (2013).Toward a Composing Model of Reading.Language Arts, 60(5), 568-

580.

Waller, R. (2011). “What Makes a Good Document? The Criteria we use.”The

University of Reading. Retrieved January 14, 2016. Pg. 16-19.
 46

APPENDIX A

LETTER TO CONDUCT THE STUDY

 47

APPENDIX B

VALIDATION SHEET
 48

APPENDIX C

SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
 49

SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
ON
READING ENGAGEMENT AND TECHNICAL WRITING
SKILLS OF STUDENTS

Dear Respondents,

You are invited to participate in my data gathering as part of my Research Paper entitled:
“READING ENGAGEMENT AND TECHNICAL WRITING SKILLS OF STUDENTS .”
Rest assured that the data gathered will be kept strictly confidential and will only be used for
the purpose of this research work.

Thank you very much.

Directions: Kindly read the items properly and tick the box that corresponds to your answer
based on the scale below.

Rating Scale Descriptive Rating

5 Always The statement is true to me at all times.

4 Oftentimes The statement is true to me most of the time

3 Sometimes The statement is quiet true to me.

2 Seldom The statement is not often true to me.

1 Never The statement is not true to me at all.

PART I. READING ENGAGEMENT

A. BEHAVIORAL ENGAGEMENT
5 4 3 2 1
As a student, I…
1. amdirectly involved in positive conduct, effort and persistence in
reading.
2. participate in extra-curricular activities such as reading skills
enhancement training.
3. enhance my reading engagement based on the contexts in which
reading occurs to foster it.
4. engage myself in compliance with school curriculum.
5. focus myself through continuous reading development.
B. COGNITIVE ENGAGEMENT
As a student, I…
1. am willing to exert the mental effort needed to comprehend
challenging reading comprehesion.
 50

2. accomplish difficult tasks in different domains in reading.

3. use self-regulatory and other strategies to guide my cognitive
effortin reading.
4. draw upon basic skills when engaging in reading comprehension.
5. interact with the content of the reading material in a deep and
thoughtful manner.
C. EMOTIONAL ENGAGEMENT
As a student, I…
1. show my affective reaction such as interest, boredom, anxiety,
among others.
2. am emotionally engaged when reading fictions.
3. internalize and immerse myselfwhen reading narrative stories.
4. show empathy during reading comprehension of stories.
5. manifest my affective reaction through simulation of the story.

PART II. TECHNICAL WRITING SKILLS

A. CLARITY
5 4 3 2 1
As a student, I…
1. understand first the reader’s background and needs for the ideal
writing technique.
2. am well aware of my audience to convey the message.
3. simplify the language and provide clarity of expression.
4. avoid unnecessary words that may put the readers in a quandary.
5. write clearly and with conciseness so that it is easier to grasp and
understand.
B. CONCISENESS
As a student, I…
1. practice effective documentation through note-taking and
recording.
2. setan ideal mood in good condition before writing.
3. show love of words consider myself as a writer.
4. use descriptions where readers feel like he or she is actually in the
scene.
5. utilize words such as artistic techniques in writing.
C. ACCESSIBLE DOCUMENT DESIGN
As a student, I…
1. spend much time ensuring my documents are laid out in a fashion
that makes readability easy.
2. stress proper usages of document design choices like bullet points,
font-size, and bold text.
3. employ images, diagrams and videos to convey complex
information.
4. make a good impression when writing to convey my idea.
5. see to it that my documentation looks professional and create a
positive images of the product.
D. AUDIENCE RECOGNITION
 51

As a student, I…
1. am writing to meet the needs, interests and background of the
readers.
2. analyzethe needs of the audience to clearly impart my idea.
3. study well who are my audience before writing.
4. make research on my audience background before writing.
5. encourage the interest of my audience through my writing.
E. ACCURACY
As a student, I…
1. know for whom the document is being written.
2. accurately write words in grammatical fashion.
3. focus on clear problem statement and by a preliminary outline
before writing.
4. carefully use language to express meaning in my writing.
5. utilize stylistic accuracy in writing.

Thank you very much for your time and cooperation.

GIOVANNI A. ALCAIN
Researcher
 52

APPENDIX D

DATA TABULATED RESULTS

 53

Table 1.1 Level of Behavioral Engagement

Behavioral Engagement Mean

1. Involving positive conduct, effort and persistence in reading. 3.97
2.Participating in activity such as reading skills enhancement. 3.63
3.Enhancing my reading skills based on the context. 3.88
4.Engaging myself in reading to comply the curriculum. 4.09
5.Focusing myself through spontaneous reading development. 3.96
Overall 3.91
 54

Table 1.2 Level of Cognitive Engagement

Cognitive Engagement Mean

1. Willing to exert mental effort in reading. 4.16
2. Accomplishing difficult task pertains in reading. 3.95
3. Using strategies to guide my cognitive effort in reading. 3.84
4. Drawing up upon basis skills when engaging reading 3.93
comprehension.
5. Interacting with the content when reading. 4.06
Overall 3.99
 55

Table 1.3 Level of Emotional Engagement

Emotional Engagement Mean

1. Showing my affective reaction when reading. 3.94
2. Engaging emotionally when reading fiction. 3.92
3. Internalizing and immersing myself when reading narrative story. 3.92
4. Showing empathy during reading comprehension. 3.99
5. Manifesting my affective reaction through simulation. 3.87
Overall 3.93
 56

Table 2.1 Level of Technical Writing Skills of students

Clarity Mean
1. Understanding the readers’ background. 3.95
2. Fully aware in Conveying the message to my audience. 3.93
3. Simplifies the language to prove clarity of expression. 3.85
4. Avoiding unnecessary words that may lead to confusion. 3.83
5. Writing clearly so that easier to understand. 3.99
Overall 3.91
 57

Table 2.2 Level of Conciseness

Conciseness Mean
1. Practicing effective documentation through note-taking. 4.03
2. Setting an ideal moog before writing. 3.93
3. Showing love of words considering myself as a writer. 4.00
4. Using descriptions to fell the readers that they are in the actual 3.87
scene.
5. Utilizing words such as artistic techniques. 3.83
Overall 3.93
 58

Table 2.3 Level of Accessible Document Design

Accessible Document Design Mean

1. Spending much time ensuring my document are laid out in 3.84
fashion.
2. Stressing proper usage of document design such as bullet 3.87
points.
3. Employing images to convey complex information. 3.93
4. Making a good impression when writing to express my idea. 3.99
5. Ensuring that my documentation looks professional. 3.97
Overall 3.92
 59

Table 2.4 Level of Audience Recognition

Audience Recognition Mean

1. Making sure to meet the needs and interest of the readers. 4.06
2. Analyzing the needs of the audience to clearly impart my idea. 4.02
3. Scrutinizing first who are my audience before writing. 4.04
4. Researching the audience background before writing. 3.93
5. Encouraging the interest of my audience through my writing. 3.95
Overall 4.00
 60

Table 2.5 Level of Accuracy

Accuracy Mean
1. Knowing for whom the document is being written. 3.93
2. Writing words in grammatical fashion. 3.91
3. Focusing the primary concern or making an outline before 3.94
writing.
4. Refining the language to express clear meaning. 4.05
5. Utilizing the context accuracy in writing. 3.96
Overall 3.96