Journal of Writing Research

Making sense of L2 written argumentation with keystroke logging

Yu Tian, Minkyung Kim, Scott Crossley — Sun, 27 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0200

This study examines associations between writing behaviors manifested by keystroke analytics and the formulation of argument elements in L2 undergraduate writers' writing processes. Ninety-nine persuasive essays written by L2 undergraduate writers were human annotated for Toulmin argument elements. The corresponding keystroke logs were segmented and analyzed to characterize the dynamics of writing processes for different categories of the elements. A multinomial mixed-effects logistic regression model was built to predict argument categories using the keystroke analytics. The study reported that L2 undergraduate writers' text production for final claims and primary claims featured P-bursts (execution processes delimited by pauses exceeding 2 seconds) of longer spans but lower production fluency compared to that for data. In addition, fewer revisions were observed when L2 writers were constructing final claims than when they were formulating data. These findings shed light on the varying cognitive loads and activities L2 undergraduate writers may experience when building different argument elements in written argumentation.

Text structure as an indicator of the writing development of descriptive text quality

Anat Stavans; Sara Zadunaisky-Ehrlich — Mon, 13 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0100

Composing a well-written text is a prolonged and challenging process. The present study explored the incipient stages in descriptive texts written (pen and paper) or dictated by 283 Hebrew-speaking Israeli children in second to fifth grades. This study aims to better understand the interplay between age, literacy-related abilities, and descriptive text quality by exploring developmental aspects across grade levels regarding text structural quality, length of text and literacy related abilities, and by analyzing the relation between text structural quality and literacy related abilities (cognitive, transcriptional, linguistic, and reading), beyond length of text and grade level. Regarding the developmental aspects, the results indicate that text structure quality becomes more sophisticated and complete with age, attaining high-quality descriptive text structure from third grade on in the production of autonomous texts with genre-driven elaborate features. Length of text and literacy related abilities also increase with age. Regarding the relation between text structural quality and literacy related abilities, we found in 2^nd grade, for P&P text, a significant total effect of syntactic lexical ability on text structure rank, partially mediated by length of text, and a weaker but still significant direct effect of syntactic lexical ability on TS rank, when controlling for length of text. We also found in 5th grade, for DICT text, a significant total effect of reading high ability on TS rank, not mediated by length of text.

Comparative approaches to the assessment of writing: Reliability and validity of benchmark rating and comparative judgement

Renske Bouwer, Marije Lesterhuis, Fien De Smedt, Hilde Van Keer, Sven De Maeyer — Sun, 27 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0200

In the past years, comparative assessment approaches have gained ground as a viable method to assess text quality. Instead of providing absolute scores to a text as in holistic or analytic scoring methods, raters in comparative assessments rate text quality by comparing texts either to pre-selected benchmarks representing different levels of writing quality (i.e., benchmark rating method) or by a series of pairwise comparisons to other texts in the sample (i.e., comparative judgement; CJ). In the present study, text quality scores from the benchmarking method and CJ are compared in terms of their reliability, convergent validity and scoring distribution. Results show that benchmark ratings and CJ-ratings were highly consistent and converged to the same construct of text quality. However, the distribution of benchmark ratings showed a central tendency. It is discussed how both methods can be integrated and used such that writing can be assessed reliably, validly, but also efficiently in both writing research and practice.

Which modality results in superior recall for students: Handwriting, typing, or drawing?

Lindsay Richardson, Guy Lacroix — Wed, 26 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0200

One of the most common interests among cognitive psychologists is establishing ways to enhance human learning. An additional layer of complexity has been brought on by the rapid evolution of technology. Specifically, examining if the mechanisms involved in typing differ from those involved in handwriting. The literature concerning the implications of encoding modality on memory have been inconclusive. This present research examined whether encoding modality resulted in performance differences for word recall. Wammes et al.’s (2016) drawing versus handwriting methodology was utilized with the addition of a typing condition. The results replicated the drawing effect, whereby drawn words were better recalled than handwritten ones. Overall, the evidence did not suggest that the mechanisms involved in handwriting led to better free recall than those involved in typing. However, if the pen is indeed mightier than the keyboard (Mueller & Oppenheimer, 2014), then the effect is not explained by visual attention or sensorimotor action differences between modalities. Implications for education are discussed.

Book review | Writing and Reading Connections: Bridging Research and Practice

Vibeke Rønneberg, Eivor Finset Spilling — Fri, 02 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0100

The book Writing and reading connections: Bridging research and practise, edited by Zoi A. Philippakos and Steve Graham (2023) is a collection of works concerning writing–reading relationships and suggestions for instructional practices that can support the synergetic development of writing and reading. The editors commence by pointing out that an instructional divide that promotes separate instruction of reading and writing exists. With this book, they argue that this divide is unfortunate and that bringing together writing and reading in research and in the classroom can yield positive effects.