Instruction in creative and argumentative writing: transfer and crossover effects on writing process and text quality

IF 2.6 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Instructional Science Pub Date : 2023-09-28 DOI:10.1007/s11251-023-09647-3
Anouk ten Peze, Tanja Janssen, Gert Rijlaarsdam, Daphne van Weijen
{"title":"Instruction in creative and argumentative writing: transfer and crossover effects on writing process and text quality","authors":"Anouk ten Peze, Tanja Janssen, Gert Rijlaarsdam, Daphne van Weijen","doi":"10.1007/s11251-023-09647-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract To investigate whether a creative writing unit in upper secondary education would improve students’ creative as well as argumentative text quality and to examine whether it would change students’ writing behavior, we tested a creative writing unit based on encouraging writing in flow by using divergent thinking tasks. Four classes (Grade 10) participated in a switching replications design. Students received either creative writing instruction (CWI) or argumentative writing instruction (AWI). Key stroke logging software recorded students’ writing processes, their Creative Self-Concept (CSC) was measured, and text quality was rated holistically. Students were positive about the design of the creative writing unit and the lessons. The effects varied per panel. The first panel showed that CWI had an effect on creative text quality compared to AWI, while AWI had no effect on argumentative text quality, compared to CWI. This pattern indicates a transfer effect of creative writing instruction on argumentative text quality. The transfer effect was moderated by CSC, with larger effects for relatively high CSC-participants. The second panel did not replicate this pattern. Instead, a crossover effect was observed of CWI in panel 1 on the effect of participating in the unit on argumentative writing in panel 2, most pronounced in high CSC-participants. Students’ creative writing speed decreased in the first panel, except for students with a relatively high Creative Self-Concept, and then increased in the second panel. Our findings may guide decisions on incorporating creative writing in the curriculum.","PeriodicalId":47990,"journal":{"name":"Instructional Science","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Instructional Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-023-09647-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract To investigate whether a creative writing unit in upper secondary education would improve students’ creative as well as argumentative text quality and to examine whether it would change students’ writing behavior, we tested a creative writing unit based on encouraging writing in flow by using divergent thinking tasks. Four classes (Grade 10) participated in a switching replications design. Students received either creative writing instruction (CWI) or argumentative writing instruction (AWI). Key stroke logging software recorded students’ writing processes, their Creative Self-Concept (CSC) was measured, and text quality was rated holistically. Students were positive about the design of the creative writing unit and the lessons. The effects varied per panel. The first panel showed that CWI had an effect on creative text quality compared to AWI, while AWI had no effect on argumentative text quality, compared to CWI. This pattern indicates a transfer effect of creative writing instruction on argumentative text quality. The transfer effect was moderated by CSC, with larger effects for relatively high CSC-participants. The second panel did not replicate this pattern. Instead, a crossover effect was observed of CWI in panel 1 on the effect of participating in the unit on argumentative writing in panel 2, most pronounced in high CSC-participants. Students’ creative writing speed decreased in the first panel, except for students with a relatively high Creative Self-Concept, and then increased in the second panel. Our findings may guide decisions on incorporating creative writing in the curriculum.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
创造性和议论文写作教学:对写作过程和文本质量的转移和交叉影响
摘要:为了探讨高中创造性写作单元是否会提高学生的创造性和议论文质量,并检查它是否会改变学生的写作行为,我们通过使用发散思维任务测试了一个基于鼓励流畅写作的创造性写作单元。10年级的4个班参与了切换复制设计。学生们接受了创意写作指导(CWI)或议论文写作指导(AWI)。用键盘敲击记录软件记录学生的写作过程,测量他们的创造性自我概念(CSC),并对文本质量进行整体评价。学生对创意写作单元的设计及课程表现积极。每个面板的效果各不相同。第一个小组显示,与AWI相比,CWI对创造性文本质量有影响,而与CWI相比,AWI对论证性文本质量没有影响。这一模式表明创意写作教学对议论文质量的转移效应。移转效应受移转能力的调节,移转能力相对较高的被试移转能力影响较大。第二个面板没有复制这种模式。相反,在小组1中观察到CWI对小组2中参与该单元对议论文写作的影响的交叉效应,在高csc参与者中最为明显。除了创意自我概念较高的学生外,学生的创意写作速度在第一个小组中下降,然后在第二个小组中增加。我们的研究结果可以指导将创意写作纳入课程的决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
4.00%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: Instructional Science, An International Journal of the Learning Sciences, promotes a deeper understanding of the nature, theory, and practice of learning and of environments in which learning occurs. The journal’s conception of learning, as well as of instruction, is broad, recognizing that there are many ways to stimulate and support learning. The journal encourages submission of research papers, covering a variety of perspectives from the learning sciences and learning, by people of all ages, in all areas of the curriculum, in technologically rich or lean environments, and in informal and formal learning contexts. Emphasizing reports of original empirical research, the journal provides space for full and detailed reporting of major studies. Regardless of the topic, papers published in the journal all make an explicit contribution to the science of learning and instruction by drawing out the implications for the design and implementation of learning environments. We particularly encourage the submission of papers that highlight the interaction between learning processes and learning environments, focus on meaningful learning, and recognize the role of context. Papers are characterized by methodological variety that ranges, for example, from experimental studies in laboratory settings, to qualitative studies, to design-based research in authentic learning settings.  The Editors will occasionally invite experts to write a review article on an important topic in the field.  When review articles are considered for publication, they must deal with central issues in the domain of learning and learning environments. The journal accepts replication studies. Such a study should replicate an important and seminal finding in the field, from a study which was originally conducted by a different research group. Most years, Instructional Science publishes a guest-edited thematic special issue on a topic central to the journal''s scope. Proposals for special issues can be sent to the Editor-in-Chief. Proposals will be discussed in Spring and Fall of each year, and the proposers will be notified afterwards.  To be considered for the Spring and Fall discussion, proposals should be sent to the Editor-in-Chief by March 1 and October 1, respectively.  Please note that articles that are submitted for a special issue will follow the same review process as regular articles.
期刊最新文献
Spaced recall reduces forgetting of fundamental mathematical concepts in a post high school precalculus course The roles that students’ ethnicity and achievement levels play in teachers’ choice of learning materials in online teaching: evidence from two experimental studies Research on the correlation between teacher classroom questioning types and student thinking development from the perspective of discourse analysis Developmental relations between mathematics self-concept, interest, and achievement: A comparison of solo- and co-taught classes Gaming the system mediates the relationship between gender and learning outcomes in a digital learning game
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1