Pub Date : 2025-02-10DOI: 10.1016/j.asw.2025.100923
Kim M. Mitchell , Johnson Li , Rasheda Rabbani
Faculty actions in the classroom are known to impact student writing self-efficacy and academic achievement. The purpose of this paper was to validate Locke and Johnston’s Individual and Collective Self-Efficacy for Teaching Writing Scales, a tool originally validated in high school teachers, in a new population of post-secondary faculty. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis methods were used in two studies with independent samples of multidisciplinary faculty (N = 281) for the exploratory factor analysis (Study 1) and nursing discipline specific faculty (N = 187) for the confirmatory factor analysis (Study 2). Three factors were identified in the questionnaire which maintained the essence of the theoretical structure proposed by Locke and Johnston. Factor 1 was named Context and Process Competencies, Factor 2 Textural Competencies, and Factor 3 Motivational Competencies. This factor structure was confirmed with acceptable goodness of fit in the confirmatory factor analysis Study 2. Learning to be a teacher of writing is a developmental process and this measurement tool has important validation information that speaks to its usefulness in understanding that process.
{"title":"Validation of the individual and collective self-efficacy scale for teaching writing in post-secondary faculty","authors":"Kim M. Mitchell , Johnson Li , Rasheda Rabbani","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100923","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100923","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Faculty actions in the classroom are known to impact student writing self-efficacy and academic achievement. The purpose of this paper was to validate Locke and Johnston’s Individual and Collective Self-Efficacy for Teaching Writing Scales, a tool originally validated in high school teachers, in a new population of post-secondary faculty. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis methods were used in two studies with independent samples of multidisciplinary faculty (N = 281) for the exploratory factor analysis (Study 1) and nursing discipline specific faculty (N = 187) for the confirmatory factor analysis (Study 2). Three factors were identified in the questionnaire which maintained the essence of the theoretical structure proposed by Locke and Johnston. Factor 1 was named Context and Process Competencies, Factor 2 Textural Competencies, and Factor 3 Motivational Competencies. This factor structure was confirmed with acceptable goodness of fit in the confirmatory factor analysis Study 2. Learning to be a teacher of writing is a developmental process and this measurement tool has important validation information that speaks to its usefulness in understanding that process.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"64 ","pages":"Article 100923"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2025-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143378798","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-02-07DOI: 10.1016/j.asw.2025.100919
Li Xiaosa , Ke Ping
Recent qualitative research on L2 students’ use of AWE (automated writing evaluation) feedback reveals that learner engagement is not simply a binary process of accepting or rejecting suggestions; rather, it is influenced by various individual and contextual factors. Building on this foundation, the present study investigates how three Chinese EFL (English as a foreign language) learners at different proficiency levels engaged with feedback from Youdao Writing, a local AWE system, over a 16-week semester. Data were collected through screen-capture recordings, stimulated recalls and semi-structured interviews, focusing on their engagement at the affective, behavioral and cognitive levels. The findings reveal significant individual and longitudinal differences in the students’ experiences, perceptions, and emotional responses. These insights highlight the complexity of student engagement with automated feedback and suggest that instructional practices in EFL contexts should account for these individual and longitudinal differences to enhance the effectiveness of feedback. The study concludes with recommendations for integrating AWE feedback in a way that can foster deeper learner engagement and facilitate writing development.
{"title":"How L2 student writers engage with automated feedback: A longitudinal perspective","authors":"Li Xiaosa , Ke Ping","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100919","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100919","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Recent qualitative research on L2 students’ use of AWE (automated writing evaluation) feedback reveals that learner engagement is not simply a binary process of accepting or rejecting suggestions; rather, it is influenced by various individual and contextual factors. Building on this foundation, the present study investigates how three Chinese EFL (English as a foreign language) learners at different proficiency levels engaged with feedback from <em>Youdao Writing</em>, a local AWE system, over a 16-week semester. Data were collected through screen-capture recordings, stimulated recalls and semi-structured interviews, focusing on their engagement at the affective, behavioral and cognitive levels. The findings reveal significant individual and longitudinal differences in the students’ experiences, perceptions, and emotional responses. These insights highlight the complexity of student engagement with automated feedback and suggest that instructional practices in EFL contexts should account for these individual and longitudinal differences to enhance the effectiveness of feedback. The study concludes with recommendations for integrating AWE feedback in a way that can foster deeper learner engagement and facilitate writing development.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"64 ","pages":"Article 100919"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143223731","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-01-29DOI: 10.1016/j.asw.2025.100915
Lujie Zheng , Sheena Kaur , Azlin Zaiti Zainal
Phraseological knowledge has gained popularity as a critical predictor of writing assessment in second and foreign language (L2/FL) learner corpus research. However, past phraseological studies on learners with different levels of language competency have overlooked multidimensional collocational indices and the potential influence of cognitive characteristics. This study, employing multiple collocational measures, tracks the growth of adjective-noun combinations in the English argumentative writings of a longitudinal cohort of 148 Chinese EFL learners over four months and explores the effects of language proficiency and working memory (WM) on their phraseological growth. Our findings revealed a general upward pattern in learners’ overall development, despite some slight fluctuations. Notably, the mixed-effects models indicated that time alone had a negative impact on learners’ use of high-frequency, diverse, and strongly associated combinations. However, language proficiency and WM modulated this process, as learners with higher proficiency or greater WM demonstrated temporal improvement across most indices. The interplay among time, language proficiency, and WM presented a more complex image in which high-proficient learners showed a sloping trend on all collocational variables as WM capacity increased, suggesting a potential impact of cognitive overload. These findings offer valuable insights for teaching and identify prospective directions for future research into phraseological knowledge development.
{"title":"The influence of working memory and proficiency on phraseological growth: A longitudinal study of adjective-noun combinations in Chinese EFL learners’ argumentative writing","authors":"Lujie Zheng , Sheena Kaur , Azlin Zaiti Zainal","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100915","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100915","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Phraseological knowledge has gained popularity as a critical predictor of writing assessment in second and foreign language (L2/FL) learner corpus research. However, past phraseological studies on learners with different levels of language competency have overlooked multidimensional collocational indices and the potential influence of cognitive characteristics. This study, employing multiple collocational measures, tracks the growth of adjective-noun combinations in the English argumentative writings of a longitudinal cohort of 148 Chinese EFL learners over four months and explores the effects of language proficiency and working memory (WM) on their phraseological growth. Our findings revealed a general upward pattern in learners’ overall development, despite some slight fluctuations. Notably, the mixed-effects models indicated that time alone had a negative impact on learners’ use of high-frequency, diverse, and strongly associated combinations. However, language proficiency and WM modulated this process, as learners with higher proficiency or greater WM demonstrated temporal improvement across most indices. The interplay among time, language proficiency, and WM presented a more complex image in which high-proficient learners showed a sloping trend on all collocational variables as WM capacity increased, suggesting a potential impact of cognitive overload. These findings offer valuable insights for teaching and identify prospective directions for future research into phraseological knowledge development.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"64 ","pages":"Article 100915"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2025-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143129908","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-01-27DOI: 10.1016/j.asw.2025.100916
Jian Xu , Yao Zheng
While the literature has established the impacts of L2 motivation, growth mindsets, and academic buoyancy on engagement, their relationships in L2 writing contexts remain relatively under-explored. Additionally, the potential mediating role of student writing assessment literacy (SWAL) in the aforementioned relationships warrants further investigation. Therefore, the present study aims to examine both the direct and indirect relationships among L2 writing motivation, growth mindsets, academic buoyancy, SWAL, and engagement as perceived by university students through questionnaire survey. Questionnaire data were gathered from a sample of 425 university students, with structural equation modeling employed for data analysis. Regarding the direct relationships, results showed that L2 writing motivation, growth mindsets, academic buoyancy, and SWAL all positively predicted L2 writing engagement; only L2 writing motivation and academic buoyancy positively predicted SWAL. In terms of the indirect relationships, SWAL mediated the relationship between L2 writing motivation and engagement, and between academic buoyancy and L2 writing engagement. Gender did not result in variations in the mediation model. Pedagogical implications for improving students’ writing motivation, assessment literacy, and engagement are discussed.
{"title":"Does student assessment literacy matter between motivational constructs and engagement in L2 writing? A survey of Chinese EFL undergraduates","authors":"Jian Xu , Yao Zheng","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100916","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100916","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>While the literature has established the impacts of L2 motivation, growth mindsets, and academic buoyancy on engagement, their relationships in L2 writing contexts remain relatively under-explored. Additionally, the potential mediating role of student writing assessment literacy (SWAL) in the aforementioned relationships warrants further investigation. Therefore, the present study aims to examine both the direct and indirect relationships among L2 writing motivation, growth mindsets, academic buoyancy, SWAL, and engagement as perceived by university students through questionnaire survey. Questionnaire data were gathered from a sample of 425 university students, with structural equation modeling employed for data analysis. Regarding the direct relationships, results showed that L2 writing motivation, growth mindsets, academic buoyancy, and SWAL all positively predicted L2 writing engagement; only L2 writing motivation and academic buoyancy positively predicted SWAL. In terms of the indirect relationships, SWAL mediated the relationship between L2 writing motivation and engagement, and between academic buoyancy and L2 writing engagement. Gender did not result in variations in the mediation model. Pedagogical implications for improving students’ writing motivation, assessment literacy, and engagement are discussed.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"64 ","pages":"Article 100916"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2025-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143129909","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-01-01DOI: 10.1016/j.asw.2024.100910
Abdulaziz Alshahrani , Neomy Storch
Despite the growing body of research on feedback provided to L2 learners on their writing, few studies have investigated the use of a scaffolded approach to feedback. Sociocultural scholars argue that for feedback to be effective it needs to be scaffolded – dynamic and aligned to the learner’s ability to correct their errors (Aljaafreh & Lantolf, 1994). Although research on scaffolded feedback have found it to improve L2 writing accuracy, most of this research has been small-scale, using one-on-one conferences. This larger classroom-based study aimed to examine the effectiveness of scaffolded written feedback and students’ perceptions of this feedback approach. The study was quasi-experimental and implemented over one academic semester. The participants were 71 male students of intermediate English proficiency, majoring in English at a large Saudi university. They were divided into two groups: one group received scaffolded feedback; the other group received unscaffolded (indirect) feedback. The feedback targeted eight grammatical structures. Findings from the immediate and delayed post-tests showed that both groups improved in their overall writing accuracy over time, with no difference evident between the two groups. Moreover, both groups showed similar improvements in six of the eight targeted grammatical structures. The scaffolded feedback group showed greater improvement than their counterparts only on two structures: subject-verb agreement and singular-plural agreement. Interview findings showed that the scaffolded feedback group liked this approach mainly because of its novelty but preferred scaffolding only when it increased in explicitness. We conclude by considering whether and how scaffolded feedback can be provided in classroom settings.
{"title":"Investigating the effectiveness of scaffolded feedback on EFL Saudi students' writing accuracy: A longitudinal classroom-based study","authors":"Abdulaziz Alshahrani , Neomy Storch","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2024.100910","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2024.100910","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Despite the growing body of research on feedback provided to L2 learners on their writing, few studies have investigated the use of a scaffolded approach to feedback. Sociocultural scholars argue that for feedback to be effective it needs to be scaffolded – dynamic and aligned to the learner’s ability to correct their errors (Aljaafreh & Lantolf, 1994). Although research on scaffolded feedback have found it to improve L2 writing accuracy, most of this research has been small-scale, using one-on-one conferences. This larger classroom-based study aimed to examine the effectiveness of scaffolded written feedback and students’ perceptions of this feedback approach. The study was quasi-experimental and implemented over one academic semester. The participants were 71 male students of intermediate English proficiency, majoring in English at a large Saudi university. They were divided into two groups: one group received scaffolded feedback; the other group received unscaffolded (indirect) feedback. The feedback targeted eight grammatical structures. Findings from the immediate and delayed post-tests showed that both groups improved in their overall writing accuracy over time, with no difference evident between the two groups. Moreover, both groups showed similar improvements in six of the eight targeted grammatical structures. The scaffolded feedback group showed greater improvement than their counterparts only on two structures: subject-verb agreement and singular-plural agreement. Interview findings showed that the scaffolded feedback group liked this approach mainly because of its novelty but preferred scaffolding only when it increased in explicitness. We conclude by considering whether and how scaffolded feedback can be provided in classroom settings.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"63 ","pages":"Article 100910"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143137050","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Task-based research has often overlooked individual differences (IDs) and task-readiness factors in developing instructional materials and curricula. This study addresses these gaps by examining how L2 writing anxiety influences the Complexity, Accuracy, Lexis, and Fluency (CALF) of writing performance across tasks with varying cognitive demands under two task-readiness conditions: task repetition and task rehearsal. Ninety undergraduate ESL students completed a questionnaire on L2 writing anxiety before performing two argumentative tasks of differing cognitive complexity, administered one week apart in a counterbalanced design. After completing the first set of tasks, participants filled out a perception questionnaire to validate the task complexity manipulation. They then repeated the same tasks within the same timeframe. The findings revealed that while anxiety positively affected syntactic complexity, it negatively impacted accuracy overall. Under task repetition (implicit preparation), anxiety reduced both syntactic complexity and accuracy. In contrast, under task rehearsal (conscious preparation), anxiety had a positive effect on lexical complexity. Specifically, in the second performance, anxiety improved both accuracy and lexical complexity under task rehearsal and enhanced fluency and lexical complexity under task repetition. However, under task rehearsal, anxiety reduced syntactic complexity for both simple and complex tasks. Under task repetition, anxiety deteriorated lexical complexity, but only when the complex task was performed. Furthermore, task repetition outperformed task rehearsal in six out of eight measures: MLTU, DC/T, CN/T, EFC/C, Vocd, and WRDFRQmc. The cognitively complex task also produced better outcomes than the simple task across these six measures, as well as WMP. Performance improved on the second attempt across all measures and WMP.
{"title":"Examining the predictive power of L2 writing anxiety on L2 writing performance in simple and complex tasks under task-readiness conditions","authors":"Mahmoud Abdi Tabari , Mahsa Farahanynia , Elouise Botes","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2024.100912","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2024.100912","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Task-based research has often overlooked individual differences (IDs) and task-readiness factors in developing instructional materials and curricula. This study addresses these gaps by examining how L2 writing anxiety influences the Complexity, Accuracy, Lexis, and Fluency (CALF) of writing performance across tasks with varying cognitive demands under two task-readiness conditions: task repetition and task rehearsal. Ninety undergraduate ESL students completed a questionnaire on L2 writing anxiety before performing two argumentative tasks of differing cognitive complexity, administered one week apart in a counterbalanced design. After completing the first set of tasks, participants filled out a perception questionnaire to validate the task complexity manipulation. They then repeated the same tasks within the same timeframe. The findings revealed that while anxiety positively affected syntactic complexity, it negatively impacted accuracy overall. Under task repetition (implicit preparation), anxiety reduced both syntactic complexity and accuracy. In contrast, under task rehearsal (conscious preparation), anxiety had a positive effect on lexical complexity. Specifically, in the second performance, anxiety improved both accuracy and lexical complexity under task rehearsal and enhanced fluency and lexical complexity under task repetition. However, under task rehearsal, anxiety reduced syntactic complexity for both simple and complex tasks. Under task repetition, anxiety deteriorated lexical complexity, but only when the complex task was performed. Furthermore, task repetition outperformed task rehearsal in six out of eight measures: MLTU, DC/T, CN/T, EFC/C, Vocd, and WRDFRQmc. The cognitively complex task also produced better outcomes than the simple task across these six measures, as well as WMP. Performance improved on the second attempt across all measures and WMP.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"63 ","pages":"Article 100912"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143137047","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-01-01DOI: 10.1016/j.asw.2025.100914
Jianling Zhan , Ying Xu
Second-language (L2) integrated writing tasks, like the story continuation writing task (SCWT), evaluate students’ reading and writing abilities. Although the relationship between writing emotions and performance has been established, the influence of reading emotions in L2 integrated writing remains understudied. The SCWT, newly incorporated into China’s college entrance exam (Gaokao), is designed to evoke emotions and stimulate imagination. This study examined gender-related differences in the relationship between reading emotions and SCWT performance, considering the mediating role of imaginative capacity. It involved 679 Chinese high school students, comprising 279 male and 400 female students, who participated in the SCWT and completed a questionnaire assessing their reading emotions (enjoyment, anxiety, curiosity) and imaginative capacity (creative and reproductive). Results indicated that female students scored significantly higher on reading enjoyment, curiosity, and writing performance than male students. Multi-group structural equation modeling analysis revealed that reading enjoyment predicted reading curiosity for both genders, and reading curiosity further predicted both types of imaginative capacity. However, the analysis revealed that among female students, writing performance was significantly enhanced by the synergistic effects of reading enjoyment, curiosity, and reproductive imagination. Pedagogical implications for promoting test fairness between gender groups and enhancing reading processes within the SCWT were discussed.
{"title":"Connecting L2 reading emotions and writing performance through imaginative capacity in the story continuation writing task: A gender difference perspective","authors":"Jianling Zhan , Ying Xu","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100914","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100914","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Second-language (L2) integrated writing tasks, like the story continuation writing task (SCWT), evaluate students’ reading and writing abilities. Although the relationship between writing emotions and performance has been established, the influence of reading emotions in L2 integrated writing remains understudied. The SCWT, newly incorporated into China’s college entrance exam (Gaokao), is designed to evoke emotions and stimulate imagination. This study examined gender-related differences in the relationship between reading emotions and SCWT performance, considering the mediating role of imaginative capacity. It involved 679 Chinese high school students, comprising 279 male and 400 female students, who participated in the SCWT and completed a questionnaire assessing their reading emotions (enjoyment, anxiety, curiosity) and imaginative capacity (creative and reproductive). Results indicated that female students scored significantly higher on reading enjoyment, curiosity, and writing performance than male students. Multi-group structural equation modeling analysis revealed that reading enjoyment predicted reading curiosity for both genders, and reading curiosity further predicted both types of imaginative capacity. However, the analysis revealed that among female students, writing performance was significantly enhanced by the synergistic effects of reading enjoyment, curiosity, and reproductive imagination. Pedagogical implications for promoting test fairness between gender groups and enhancing reading processes within the SCWT were discussed.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"63 ","pages":"Article 100914"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143137020","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-01-01DOI: 10.1016/j.asw.2024.100911
Saleh Mosleh Alharthi
Despite the role of dialogue in feedback uptake, no study has examined students’ uptake in different dialogue-based settings. Therefore, this study on 20 EFL Saudi students examined their uptake of feedback in self-dialogue-based, learner-learner dialogue-based, and teacher-learner dialogue-based editing settings. Analysis of teacher corrective feedback and students’ first and revised drafts of essays revealed that the rates of uptake quantity (92.3 %, 97.5 % & 95.4 %) and uptake quality (71.3 %, 80.5 % & 93.4 %) varied across the three settings, respectively. Moreover, while students integrated more global feedback in the teacher-learner dialogue (38.8 %) and learner-learner dialogue-based editing settings (38.8 %), they integrated more local feedback (69.1 %) in the self-dialogue-based editing setting. A post-hoc analysis showed significant differences in the uptake quantity in favor of learner-learner dialogue-based and teacher-learner dialogue-based editing settings and in the uptake quality in favor of the teacher-learner dialogue-based editing setting. Moreover, learner-learner and teacher-learner dialogue-based editing settings led to higher global feedback quality than self-dialogue-based setting. Students’ local feedback uptake differed significantly for the self-dialogue-based and teacher-learner dialogue-based editing settings. Despite the perceived learning benefits of feedback dialogues, students were challenged by initial apprehensions, feedback nature and technology use in feedback dialogues. The study offers useful implications for teachers and researchers.
{"title":"Examining EFL learners’ quantity and quality of uptake of teacher corrective feedback on writing across three different editing settings","authors":"Saleh Mosleh Alharthi","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2024.100911","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2024.100911","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Despite the role of dialogue in feedback uptake, no study has examined students’ uptake in different dialogue-based settings. Therefore, this study on 20 EFL Saudi students examined their uptake of feedback in self-dialogue-based, learner-learner dialogue-based, and teacher-learner dialogue-based editing settings. Analysis of teacher corrective feedback and students’ first and revised drafts of essays revealed that the rates of uptake quantity (92.3 %, 97.5 % & 95.4 %) and uptake quality (71.3 %, 80.5 % & 93.4 %) varied across the three settings, respectively. Moreover, while students integrated more global feedback in the teacher-learner dialogue (38.8 %) and learner-learner dialogue-based editing settings (38.8 %), they integrated more local feedback (69.1 %) in the self-dialogue-based editing setting. A post-hoc analysis showed significant differences in the uptake quantity in favor of learner-learner dialogue-based and teacher-learner dialogue-based editing settings and in the uptake quality in favor of the teacher-learner dialogue-based editing setting. Moreover, learner-learner and teacher-learner dialogue-based editing settings led to higher global feedback quality than self-dialogue-based setting. Students’ local feedback uptake differed significantly for the self-dialogue-based and teacher-learner dialogue-based editing settings. Despite the perceived learning benefits of feedback dialogues, students were challenged by initial apprehensions, feedback nature and technology use in feedback dialogues. The study offers useful implications for teachers and researchers.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"63 ","pages":"Article 100911"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143137049","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-01-01DOI: 10.1016/j.asw.2024.100913
Edsoulla Chung, Aaron Wan
A good command of academic vocabulary is important for academic success in higher education. However, research has primarily focused on the receptive academic vocabulary knowledge of L2 learners while devoting relatively limited attention to their productive use of such vocabulary and its impact on writing quality. To address this gap, we analysed the problem-solution essays written by 168 first-year undergraduates in Hong Kong, focusing on the relationship between their use of academic words in the Academic Vocabulary List (AVL) and the overall quality of their writing. We also explored the relationship between the size of students’ receptive academic vocabulary and the frequency of its use in writing. Findings revealed that essays with high scores contained a greater density and diversity of academic vocabulary than low-scored essays, with greater frequency of words in the 1–500 and 501–1000 tiers of the AVL significantly predicting better writing quality. The essays also showed a significant relationship between the participants’ receptive academic vocabulary size and the diversity of academic words used in writing. However, no significant relationship was observed between receptive academic vocabulary size and the density of academic words used. We highlight the implications of these findings for EAP teaching and research.
{"title":"Examining the use of academic vocabulary in first-year ESL undergraduates’ writing: A corpus-driven study in Hong Kong","authors":"Edsoulla Chung, Aaron Wan","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2024.100913","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2024.100913","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>A good command of academic vocabulary is important for academic success in higher education. However, research has primarily focused on the receptive academic vocabulary knowledge of L2 learners while devoting relatively limited attention to their productive use of such vocabulary and its impact on writing quality. To address this gap, we analysed the problem-solution essays written by 168 first-year undergraduates in Hong Kong, focusing on the relationship between their use of academic words in the Academic Vocabulary List (AVL) and the overall quality of their writing. We also explored the relationship between the size of students’ receptive academic vocabulary and the frequency of its use in writing. Findings revealed that essays with high scores contained a greater density and diversity of academic vocabulary than low-scored essays, with greater frequency of words in the 1–500 and 501–1000 tiers of the AVL significantly predicting better writing quality. The essays also showed a significant relationship between the participants’ receptive academic vocabulary size and the diversity of academic words used in writing. However, no significant relationship was observed between receptive academic vocabulary size and the density of academic words used. We highlight the implications of these findings for EAP teaching and research.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"63 ","pages":"Article 100913"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143137021","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-01-01DOI: 10.1016/j.asw.2024.100909
Jiali Wang, Young-Suk G. Kim, Joseph Hin Yan Lam, Molly Ann Leachman
Students’ proficiency in constructing sentences impacts the writing process and writing products. Linguistic demands in writing differ in terms of both student characteristics and measurement features. To identify various syntactic demands considering these features, we conducted a meta-analysis examining the relationships between syntactic features (complexity and accuracy) and writing performance (quality, productivity, and fluency) and moderating effects of both student characteristics and measurement features. A total of 109 studies (effect sizes: 871; the total number of participants: 24,628) met the inclusion criteria. Results showed that there was a weak relationship for syntactic accuracy (r = .25) and complexity (r = .16). Writers' characteristics, including grade level and language proficiency, and measurement features, writing genres, writing outcomes, whether the writing task is text-based or not, and type of syntactic complexity measures, were significant moderators for certain syntactic features. The findings highlighted the importance of writer and measurement factors when considering the relationships between linguistic features in writing and writing performance. Implications were discussed regarding the selection of syntactic features in assessing language use in writing, gaps in the literature, and significance for writing instruction and assessment.
{"title":"A meta-analysis of relationships between syntactic features and writing performance and how the relationships vary by student characteristics and measurement features","authors":"Jiali Wang, Young-Suk G. Kim, Joseph Hin Yan Lam, Molly Ann Leachman","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2024.100909","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2024.100909","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Students’ proficiency in constructing sentences impacts the writing process and writing products. Linguistic demands in writing differ in terms of both student characteristics and measurement features. To identify various syntactic demands considering these features, we conducted a meta-analysis examining the relationships between syntactic features (complexity and accuracy) and writing performance (quality, productivity, and fluency) and moderating effects of both student characteristics and measurement features. A total of 109 studies (effect sizes: 871; the total number of participants: 24,628) met the inclusion criteria. Results showed that there was a weak relationship for syntactic accuracy (r = .25) and complexity (r = .16). Writers' characteristics, including grade level and language proficiency, and measurement features, writing genres, writing outcomes, whether the writing task is text-based or not, and type of syntactic complexity measures, were significant moderators for certain syntactic features. The findings highlighted the importance of writer and measurement factors when considering the relationships between linguistic features in writing and writing performance. Implications were discussed regarding the selection of syntactic features in assessing language use in writing, gaps in the literature, and significance for writing instruction and assessment.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"63 ","pages":"Article 100909"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143137019","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号