A comparison between input modalities and languages in source-based multilingual argumentative writing

IF 4.2 1区 文学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Assessing Writing Pub Date : 2024-01-31 DOI:10.1016/j.asw.2024.100813
Roberto Arias-Hermoso, Ainara Imaz Agirre, Eneritz Garro Larrañaga
{"title":"A comparison between input modalities and languages in source-based multilingual argumentative writing","authors":"Roberto Arias-Hermoso,&nbsp;Ainara Imaz Agirre,&nbsp;Eneritz Garro Larrañaga","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2024.100813","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span>This paper examines secondary education<span> students’ multilingual writing based on two input modalities to understand the influence of input on argumentation and sourcing strategies. Participants produced texts in </span></span>Basque, Spanish and English based on a video or a text, and texts were analysed to explore their production of argumentation elements and sourcing strategies. Differences were found between input modalities in the use of data and rebuttals, and in copying. Across-language differences were also found in the use of data and counterarguments, and in the use of original ideas and paraphrasing. Additionally, complex argumentation elements elicited more original ideas than simple ones. Findings suggest that different writing sub-processes might be activated when composing from different sources and that argumentation and sourcing might be transferable across languages. These results may have important implications for educators in multilingual programs who aim to support their students in acquiring academic writing skills in multiple languages.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"60 ","pages":"Article 100813"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Assessing Writing","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1075293524000060","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","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

This paper examines secondary education students’ multilingual writing based on two input modalities to understand the influence of input on argumentation and sourcing strategies. Participants produced texts in Basque, Spanish and English based on a video or a text, and texts were analysed to explore their production of argumentation elements and sourcing strategies. Differences were found between input modalities in the use of data and rebuttals, and in copying. Across-language differences were also found in the use of data and counterarguments, and in the use of original ideas and paraphrasing. Additionally, complex argumentation elements elicited more original ideas than simple ones. Findings suggest that different writing sub-processes might be activated when composing from different sources and that argumentation and sourcing might be transferable across languages. These results may have important implications for educators in multilingual programs who aim to support their students in acquiring academic writing skills in multiple languages.

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
基于源语言的多语言议论文写作中输入模式和语言的比较
本文研究了中学生基于两种输入模式的多语言写作,以了解输入对论证和来源策略的影响。参与者根据视频或文本用巴斯克语、西班牙语和英语撰写文章,并对文章进行分析,以探究其论证要素和来源策略。结果发现,不同输入模式在使用数据和反驳以及复制方面存在差异。在使用数据和反驳方面,以及在使用原创观点和仿写方面,也发现了不同语言之间的差异。此外,复杂的论证要素比简单的论证要素更能激发原创性观点。研究结果表明,在从不同来源进行写作时,可能会激活不同的写作子过程,而且论证和来源可能可以跨语言转换。这些结果对于旨在帮助学生掌握多语种学术写作技能的多语种课程的教育者来说可能具有重要意义。
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
Assessing Writing
Assessing Writing Multiple-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
17.90%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: Assessing Writing is a refereed international journal providing a forum for ideas, research and practice on the assessment of written language. Assessing Writing publishes articles, book reviews, conference reports, and academic exchanges concerning writing assessments of all kinds, including traditional (direct and standardised forms of) testing of writing, alternative performance assessments (such as portfolios), workplace sampling and classroom assessment. The journal focuses on all stages of the writing assessment process, including needs evaluation, assessment creation, implementation, and validation, and test development.
期刊最新文献
A comparative study of voice in Chinese English-major undergraduates’ timed and untimed argument writing The impact of task duration on the scoring of independent writing responses of adult L2-English writers A structural equation investigation of linguistic features as indices of writing quality in assessed secondary-level EMI learners’ scientific reports Detecting and assessing AI-generated and human-produced texts: The case of second language writing teachers Validating an integrated reading-into-writing scale with trained university students
×
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