A comparison of text structure and self-regulated strategy instruction for elementary school students’ writing

IF 0.8 4区 教育学 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH English Teaching-Practice and Critique Pub Date : 2019-10-14 DOI:10.1108/ETPC-07-2018-0070
Feng Teng
{"title":"A comparison of text structure and self-regulated strategy instruction for elementary school students’ writing","authors":"Feng Teng","doi":"10.1108/ETPC-07-2018-0070","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThis study aims to examine the writing outcomes of 6th-grade students learning English as a second language.Design/methodology/approachIn all 45 students in a text structure instruction (TSI) group were compared with 45 students in a self-regulated strategy instruction (SRSI) group and 43 students receiving traditional writing instruction. SRSI was adapted from the self-regulated strategy development (SRSD) model (MacArthur et al., 2015). The SRSD model includes self-regulation writing strategies, text and genre knowledge and think-aloud modeling. Findings allowed for a comparison of TSI and SRSI, in which organization knowledge does not need to be taught using SRSD methods. Measures of writing outcomes, including writing quality and summarization of main ideas, were administered after a one-month intervention.FindingsResults revealed that, compared with traditional instruction, the TSI and SRSI groups each exhibited better writing outcomes. Compared with the traditional instruction group, each technique had a unique impact: SRSI on writing quality, and TSI on main ideas included in written summaries. Linguistic and textual analyses of students’ writing revealed that the TSI and SRSI group learners both demonstrated high syntactic complexity, content organization and lexical variation in their compositions.Research limitations/implicationsThe present study provides empirical evidence that explicit teaching of SRSI writing strategies or TSI can be implemented effectively and elicit gains in elementary school L2 learners’ written output. A clear division does not exist between self-regulated writing strategies and text structure knowledge; the two techniques should be complementary, as suggested in the earlier SRSD model.Originality/valueClassroom-based research has addressed the need to enhance self-regulated capacity in writing. However, writing has become more challenging for primary school learners. In addition, writing is a cognitively demanding process. The plethora of processes involved in writing may be one of the factors that caused difficulties in writing. Thus, writing proficiency relies on the development of text structure knowledge and the fostering of self-regulation capabilities.","PeriodicalId":45885,"journal":{"name":"English Teaching-Practice and Critique","volume":"66 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"English Teaching-Practice and Critique","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ETPC-07-2018-0070","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

Abstract

PurposeThis study aims to examine the writing outcomes of 6th-grade students learning English as a second language.Design/methodology/approachIn all 45 students in a text structure instruction (TSI) group were compared with 45 students in a self-regulated strategy instruction (SRSI) group and 43 students receiving traditional writing instruction. SRSI was adapted from the self-regulated strategy development (SRSD) model (MacArthur et al., 2015). The SRSD model includes self-regulation writing strategies, text and genre knowledge and think-aloud modeling. Findings allowed for a comparison of TSI and SRSI, in which organization knowledge does not need to be taught using SRSD methods. Measures of writing outcomes, including writing quality and summarization of main ideas, were administered after a one-month intervention.FindingsResults revealed that, compared with traditional instruction, the TSI and SRSI groups each exhibited better writing outcomes. Compared with the traditional instruction group, each technique had a unique impact: SRSI on writing quality, and TSI on main ideas included in written summaries. Linguistic and textual analyses of students’ writing revealed that the TSI and SRSI group learners both demonstrated high syntactic complexity, content organization and lexical variation in their compositions.Research limitations/implicationsThe present study provides empirical evidence that explicit teaching of SRSI writing strategies or TSI can be implemented effectively and elicit gains in elementary school L2 learners’ written output. A clear division does not exist between self-regulated writing strategies and text structure knowledge; the two techniques should be complementary, as suggested in the earlier SRSD model.Originality/valueClassroom-based research has addressed the need to enhance self-regulated capacity in writing. However, writing has become more challenging for primary school learners. In addition, writing is a cognitively demanding process. The plethora of processes involved in writing may be one of the factors that caused difficulties in writing. Thus, writing proficiency relies on the development of text structure knowledge and the fostering of self-regulation capabilities.
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
小学学生写作篇章结构与自主策略教学之比较
目的本研究旨在考察六年级学生以英语为第二语言学习的写作成绩。设计/方法/方法文本结构指导组(TSI)的45名学生与自我调节策略指导组(SRSI)的45名学生和接受传统写作指导的43名学生进行了比较。SRSI改编自自我调节策略发展(SRSD)模型(MacArthur et al., 2015)。SRSD模型包括自我调节写作策略、文本和体裁知识以及有声思考模型。研究结果允许对TSI和SRSI进行比较,其中不需要使用SRSD方法教授组织知识。在一个月的干预后,对写作结果进行测量,包括写作质量和主要思想的总结。结果显示,与传统教学相比,TSI组和SRSI组都表现出更好的写作效果。与传统教学组相比,每种技术都有独特的影响:SRSI对写作质量的影响,TSI对书面摘要中包含的主要思想的影响。对学生作文的语言和语篇分析表明,TSI组和SRSI组学习者在作文中都表现出较高的句法复杂性、内容组织和词汇多样性。研究局限/启示本研究提供了经验证据,表明SRSI写作策略或TSI的显式教学可以有效实施,并在小学二语学习者的书面输出中获得收益。自主写作策略与篇章结构知识之间没有明确的界限;正如前面的SRSD模型所建议的那样,这两种技术应该是互补的。原创性/价值基于课堂的研究解决了提高自我调节写作能力的需要。然而,对于小学生来说,写作变得更具挑战性。此外,写作是一个对认知要求很高的过程。写作中涉及的过多的过程可能是造成写作困难的因素之一。因此,熟练的写作依赖于文本结构知识的发展和自我调节能力的培养。
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
1.40
自引率
11.10%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: English Teaching: Practice and Critique seeks to promote research and theory related to English literacy that is grounded in a range of contexts: classrooms, schools and wider educational constituencies. The journal has as its main focus English teaching in L1 settings. Submissions focused on EFL will be considered only if they have clear pertinence to English literacy in L1 settings. It provides a place where authors from a range of backgrounds can identify matters of common concern and thereby foster broad professional communities and networks. Where possible, English Teaching: Practice and Critique encourages comparative approaches to topics and issues. The journal published three types of manuscripts: research articles, essays (theoretical papers, reviews, and responses), and teacher narratives. Often special issues of the journal focus on distinct topics; however, unthemed manuscript submissions are always welcome and published in most issues.
期刊最新文献
Experiencing the cycles of love in teaching: the praxis of an early career Asian American ELA teacher Reading with love: the potential of critical posthuman reading practices in preservice English education Claiming a space in the W/writerly community to increase English Language Arts teacher agency “I’m really just scared of the White parents”: a teacher navigates perceptions of barriers to discussing racial injustice Playful literacies and pedagogical priorities: digital games in the English classroom
×
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