Building literacy in alphabetic, abjad and morphosyllabic systems

Preschoolers?? metalinguistic and visual capabilities may be associated with the writing system of their culture. We examined patterns of performance in phonological awareness, naming of letters, morphological awareness, and visual-spatial relations, in 5-year-old native speakers of Spanish (n?=?43), Hebrew (n?=?40), and Cantonese (n?=?63) and the relations of these literacy related skills to concurrent word writing and word reading. The writing systems in these languages represent three major categories, i.e., alphabetic (Spanish), abjad (Hebrew), and morphosyllabic (Chinese). Phonological awareness, letter naming, and perception of visual-spatial relations differed across groups, whereas morphological awareness showed a similar level of attainment in all three languages. Stepwise regression analyses explaining writing and reading for each language separately revealed both commonalities and differences between languages. Phonological awareness assessed by initial syllable deletion contributed to writing and to reading in Cantonese and in Spanish. Phonological awareness assessed by final phoneme isolation explained reading in Hebrew, whereas final and initial phoneme isolation explained writing in Hebrew. Letter naming predicted both writing and reading in Spanish and in Hebrew, while perception of visual-spatial relations did so in Cantonese. At age 5, children??s metalinguistic knowledge and visual discrimination abilities are already attuned to the particular features of the writing system to which they are exposed.     

An evaluation of the written texts of children with SLI: the contributions of oral language, reading and phonological short-term memory

In this study, we performed a fine grained analysis of writing by children with a specific language impairment (SLI) and examined the contribution of oral language, phonological short-term memory (STM), nonverbal ability, and word reading to three writing constructs (productivity, complexity and accuracy). Forty-six children with SLI were compared with 42 children matched for chronological age, receptive vocabulary (N = 46) and reading decoding (N = 46) on a measure of narrative writing. The SLI group performed worse on all measures compared to children of a similar chronological age. The SLI group produced a greater proportion of orthographic spelling errors than children with similar receptive vocabularies, but were comparable to children matched for reading decoding. The children with SLI showed specific difficulties in the omission of whole words (e.g. auxiliary verbs and subject nouns) and omissions of grammatical morphology (e.g. past tense—ed) reflecting the difficulties shown in their oral language. Receptive grammar made a significant contribution to writing complexity and accuracy. Phonological fluency contributed to writing productivity, such as the production of diverse vocabulary, ideas and content and writing fluency. Phonological STM and word reading explained additional variance in writing accuracy over and above the SLI group’s oral language skills.     

Parental writing support and preschoolers’ early literacy,language, and fine motor skills

The current study examines the nature and variability of parents’ aid to preschoolers in the context of a shared writing task, as well as the relations between this support and children's literacy, vocabulary, and fine motor skills. In total, 135 preschool children (72 girls) and their parents (primarily mothers) in an ethnically diverse, middle-income community were observed while writing a semi-structured invitation for a pretend birthday party together. Children's phonological awareness, alphabet knowledge, word decoding, vocabulary, and fine motor skills were also assessed. Results revealed that parents provided variable, but generally low-level, support for children's approximation of sound-symbol correspondence in their writing (i.e., graphophonemic support), as well as for their production of letter forms (i.e., print support). Parents frequently accepted errors rather than asking for corrections (i.e., demand for precision). Further analysis of the parent–child dyads (n = 103) who wrote the child's name on the invitation showed that parents provided higher graphophonemic, but not print, support when writing the child's name than other words. Overall parental graphophonemic support was positively linked to children's decoding and fine motor skills, whereas print support and demand for precision were not related to any of the child outcomes. In sum, this study indicates that while parental support for preschoolers’ writing may be minimal, it is uniquely linked to key literacy-related outcomes in preschool.     

Language,literacy, attentional behaviors,and instructional quality predictors of written composition for first graders

We had two primary purposes in the present study: (1) to examine unique child-level predictors of written composition which included language skills, literacy skills (e.g., reading and spelling), and attentiveness and (2) to examine whether instructional quality (quality in responsiveness and individualization, and quality in spelling and writing instruction) is uniquely related to written composition for first-grade children (N = 527). Children's written composition was evaluated on substantive quality (ideas, organization, word choice, and sentence flow) and writing conventions (spelling, mechanics, and handwriting). Results revealed that for the substantive quality of writing, children's grammatical knowledge, reading comprehension, letter writing automaticity, and attentiveness were uniquely related. Teachers’ responsiveness was also uniquely related to the substantive quality of written composition after accounting for child predictors and other instructional quality variables. For the writing conventions outcome, children's spelling and attentiveness were uniquely related, but instructional quality was not. These results suggest the importance of paying attention to multiple component skills such as language, literacy, and behavioral factors as well as teachers’ responsiveness for writing development.     

Comparing effects of different writing activities on reading comprehension: A meta-analysis

The purposes of this review were to determine: (1) if different writing activities were more effective than others in improving students’ reading comprehension, and (2) if obtained differences among writing activities was related to how reading comprehension was measured? Meta-analysis was used to examine these questions across studies involving students in grades 1–12. Nineteen studies were located that met inclusion criteria, resulting in 4 writing activities comparisons with 4 or more studies per comparison: summary writing versus answering questions (k = 5), summary writing versus note taking (k = 7), answering questions versus note taking (k = 4), and answering questions versus extended writing activities (k = 6). Effect sizes calculated for each writing activities comparison indicated there were no statistically significant differences for any of these comparisons when effects were averaged over all reading comprehension measures, excluding treatment-inherent measures. However, statistically significant differences were found for two of the comparisons on specific measures. Extended writing enhanced reading comprehension better than question answering on measures where comprehension was assessed via an extended writing activity, whereas summary writing enhanced reading comprehension better than question answering on a free recall measure. The results provide limited support for the theoretical viewpoint that writing activities are differentially effective in improving reading comprehension based on how closely the writing activities are aligned with a particular measure.     

Do we need a single standard of value for institutional assessment? An essay response to Asao Inoue's “community-based assessment pedagogy”

Inoue [Inoue, A. B. (2005). Community-based assessment pedagogy. Assesing Writing: An International Journal, 3, 208–238] sets up a radically experimental writing class as a kind of laboratory of assessment. He seeks to avoid the standard situation where a teacher unilaterally assesses and grades student writing, using only his or her own criteria or standard. His premise is that value in writing is socially constructed, and so he gets students to enact a social, communal process to work out the criteria for effective writing. In this way he gets students to take full responsibility for assessing and even grading each other.But when he requires his students to agree on a single model of good writing (a “rubric” with various dimensions), I think he misunderstands how value is actually socially constructed. In fact we live in a world with various models of good or effective writing. Given, however, that he is working in an institutional setting, his approach seems readily understandable. How can feedback be coherent or final grades be fair if they are based on multiple and competing models of goodness? This sounds like a rhetorical question, but in fact I use this essay to argue that it is not only feasible but desirable to use multiple models of value in an institutional setting.     

Teaching writing to middle school students in Portugal and in Brazil: an exploratory study

Learning how to write is a challenging process, typically developed in schools. Teachers’ practices in teaching writing, however, have been under researched. The aim of this study was to survey a sample of teachers from Portugal (n = 96) and Brazil (n = 99) about their practices for and perceptions about writing instruction. Teachers reported on time devoted to student writing and the teaching of writing, on their practices to promote students’ self-regulated writing, adaptations for less skilled writers, and their perceptions about writing and the teaching of writing. Findings from this survey raised concerns about the quality of writing instruction in both countries. Teachers reported little time devoted for writing and the teaching of writing in their classes. The majority of the teachers rarely used practices to promote students’ self-regulated writing or applied explicit teaching methods for writing instruction. Both Portuguese and Brazilian teachers perceived writing as a shared responsibility. Brazilian teachers, however, agreed with this perception more strongly. Portuguese teachers’ perception of the importance of writing for students’ academic and professional success was higher than the perceptions held by Brazilian teachers. A positive correlation was found between teachers’ preparation to teach writing and their practices to promote students’ self-regulated writing. The implications of these findings are discussed.     

Using generalizability theory to examine the accuracy and validity of large-scale ESL writing assessment

Using generalizability (G-) theory, this study examined the accuracy and validity of the writing scores assigned to secondary school ESL students in the provincial English examinations in Canada. The major research question that guided this study was: Are there any differences between the accuracy and construct validity of the analytic scores assigned to ESL students and to NE students for the provincial English writing examination across three years? A series of G-studies and decision (D-) studies for three years were conducted to examine accuracy and validity issues. Results showed that differences in score accuracy did exist between ESL and NE students when initial (pre-adjudication) scores were used. The observed G-coefficients for ESL students were significantly lower than those for NE students in all three years, indicating that there were less accuracy and increased errors associated with the writing scores assigned to ESL students. Further, there were significantly less convergent validity in one year and less discriminant validity in all three years of the writing scores assigned to ESL students than to NE students. These findings raise a potential question about the presence of bias in the assessment of ESL students’ writing if initial scores were used.     

Clarifying an Elusive Construct: a Systematic Review of Writing Attitudes

Although research recognizes that student attitudes toward writing have the potential to influence a variety of writing outcomes, there is no consensus as to what writing attitude signifies. Further, disparities between conceptualizations of writing attitude make the extant literature difficult to reconcile. In the present study, we systematically review writing attitude research published between 1990 and 2017. Our search procedure and quality analysis led to the retention of 46 articles examining the writing attitudes of students and teachers. Relatively few studies (n = 10) provided an explicit definition of writing attitudes. Further, although the authors of many studies (n = 16) conceptualized writing attitude as including a measure of liking/disliking writing, there was considerable variability in both conceptualization and operationalization throughout the literature, with some studies including measures of self-efficacy, perceived value, and other related constructs. Student writing attitudes were measured in a majority of the included studies (n = 33), and teacher writing attitudes were measured in substantially fewer studies (n = 6). Based on the findings of this review, we offer suggestions for researchers making inferences from studies of writing attitudes. Themes of the reviewed literature and implications for future research are also discussed.     

Voice in high-stakes L1 academic writing assessment: Implications for L2 writing instruction

Despite the debate among writing researchers about its viability as a pedagogical tool in writing instruction [e.g., Helms-Park, R., & Stapleton, P. (2003). Questioning the importance of individualized voice in undergraduate L2 argumentative writing: An empirical study with pedagogical implications. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12 (3), 245–265; Stapleton, P. (2002). Critiquing voice as a viable pedagogical tool in L2 writing: Returning spotlight to ideas. Journal of Second Language Writing, 11 (3), 177–190], voice remains one of the constructs commonly addressed in learning standards and assessed in high-stakes English Language Arts tests. It is assumed, therefore, that the presence of a strong authorial voice plays an important role in the evaluation of the overall quality of students’ writing. In reality, however, there is a critical lack of empirical research that explores the nature and characteristics of the relationship between voice and overall writing quality. The present study builds on and extends the work of Helms-Park and Stapleton [Helms-Park, R., & Stapleton, P. (2003). Questioning the importance of individualized voice in undergraduate L2 argumentative writing: An empirical study with pedagogical implications. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12 (3), 245–265] and examines such a relationship in the context of an L1 high-stakes academic writing assessment. Results show a positive and significant relationship between voice intensity and writing quality, which contradicts what Helms-Park and Stapleton [Helms-Park, R., & Stapleton, P. (2003). Questioning the importance of individualized voice in undergraduate L2 argumentative writing: An empirical study with pedagogical implications. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12 (3), 245–265] found in the context of L2 argumentative writing. This study therefore contributes to the exploration of the role of voice in writing instruction and assessment.     

“It takes two”: The added value of structured peer-assisted writing in explicit writing instruction

High-quality writing instruction is vital to supporting developing writers as they learn to plan, compose, and revise text. It is equally important that such instruction enhances students’ self-efficacy for writing as well as their motivation to write. The main aim of the present study was to investigate the incremental effect of peer-assisted writing in an explicit writing instruction program on Flemish upper-elementary students’ writing performance, self-efficacy for writing, and writing motivation. A randomized control design, using multilevel analyses, was conducted to determine the differential effectiveness of two experimental writing treatments (EI+PA and EI+IND) compared to a business as usual control condition (BAU). Both experimental writing treatments involved explicit instruction in writing, with students in one condition writing with a peer (EI+PA) and students in the other condition writing individually (EI+IND). Participating classes (N = 431 students, N = 20 teachers) were randomly assigned to the three conditions and students were assessed before and after instruction. EI+PA students outperformed both EI+IND and BAU students on the writing measure in the instructed genre but not in the uninstructed genre. Additionally, although EI+PA students were more confident as to their capability (self-efficacy) to generate ideas when compared to their EI+IND counterparts, EI+PA students’ writing motivation, characterized by internal or external motives, was significantly lower than EI+IND students. The findings of the present study corroborate and extend the limited number of prior studies illustrating the surplus value of peer-assisted writing in explicit writing instruction programs.     

Reflection through assessment: A systematic narrative review of teacher feedback and student self-perception

Beginning with two important meta-analyses by Hattie and Timperley (2007) and Shute (2008), the relationship between teacher feedback and student self-perception has received more attention. One way students enact a self-perception is by reflectively writing about their participation within a particular field of study. The current review analyzes how teacher feedback facilitates and supports the formation of self-perception made visible in students’ reflective writing. The following electronic databases were searched up to February 2018: CINAHL, Academic Search Complete, PsycINFO, ERIC, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, and Google Scholar. Five themes in total were constructed. These themes indicate contexts when feedback might lead to students reflecting through writing on a self-perception. Features of feedback that most likely promote this kind of reflection can be described as: content situated, dialogic, and empathic. As a secondary category of themes, feedback should position students as: fluid and/or vulnerable.     

Tracking the mind during writing: immediacy, delayed, and anticipatory effects on pauses and writing rate

This study examines the dynamics of cognitive processes during writing. Participants were 5th, 7th and 9th graders ranging in age from 10 to 15?years. They were shown a short silent video composed of clips illustrating conflictual situations between people in school, and were invited to produce a narrative text. Three chronometric measures of word n were analyzed using a Linear Mixed-Effects Model regression procedure: pause duration before word n, pause duration within word n, and writing rate of word n. The predictors were sublexical and lexical properties of word n, i.e., immediacy effects, word n ? 1, i.e., delayed effects, and of word n?+?1, i.e., anticipatory effects. The writing-rate and the intra-word-pause measures show both immediacy and anticipatory effects. However, the between-word-pause durations show only delayed effects, which has not been reported in previous studies. As far as we know, our study is the first investigation which reveals the occurrence of parallel and serial effects in written text production: preprocessing of word n?+?1 occurs when word n is being written, and properties of word n ? 1 still exert their influences while the pen has already moved to the next word.     

Validating automated essay scoring for online writing placement

In this paper, I describe the design and evaluation of automated essay scoring (AES) models for an institution's writing placement program. Information was gathered on admitted student writing performance at a science and technology research university in the northeastern United States. Under timed conditions, first-year students (N = 879) were assigned to write essays on two persuasive prompts within the Criterion^® Online Writing Evaluation Service at the beginning of the semester. AES models were built and evaluated for a total of four prompts. AES models meeting recommended performance criteria were then compared to standardized admissions measures and locally developed writing measures. Results suggest that there is evidence to support the use of Criterion as part of the placement process at the institution.     

Feedback providing improvement strategies and reflection on feedback use: Effects on students’ writing motivation, process, and performance

This study investigated the effects of feedback providing improvement strategies and a reflection assignment on students’ writing motivation, process, and performance. Students in the experimental feedback condition (n = 41) received feedback including improvement strategies, whereas students in the control feedback condition (n = 41) received feedback without improvement strategies. Within each feedback condition, half of the students received a reflection assignment on feedback use and the revision (experimental reflection condition), while the other half received a reflection assignment on feedback perception (control reflection condition). Results indicated that in the experimental feedback condition writing performance gained from the control reflection assignment, while in the control feedback condition it gained from the experimental reflection assignment. Improvement strategies negatively predicted self-efficacy beliefs, especially when initial self-efficacy beliefs were low, and positively predicted planning/revising. Reflections on feedback use and the revision positively predicted mastery goal when mastery goal initially was low or moderate.     

Grammar for writing? An investigation of the effects of contextualised grammar teaching on students’ writing

The role of grammar instruction in the teaching of writing is contested in most Anglophone countries, with several robust meta-analyses finding no evidence of any beneficial effect. However, existing research is limited in that it only considers isolated grammar instruction and offers no theorisation of an instructional relationship between grammar and writing. This study, drawing on a theorised understanding of grammar as a meaning-making resource for writing development, set out to investigate the impact of contextualised grammar instruction on students’ writing performance. The study adopted a mixed-methods approach, with a randomised controlled trial and a complementary qualitative study. The statistical analyses indicate a positive effect on writing performance for the intervention group (e = 0.21; p < 0.001); but the study also indicates that the intervention impact differentially on different sub-groups, benefiting able writers more than weaker writers. The study is significant in being the first to supply rigorous, theorised evidence for the potential benefits of teaching grammar to support development in writing.