Learning to write syntheses: the effect of process feedback and of observing models on performance and process behaviors

IF 2 2区教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

Reading and Writing Pub Date : 2023-11-01 DOI:10.1007/s11145-023-10483-7

Nina Vandermeulen, Elke Van Steendam, Sven De Maeyer, Marije Lesterhuis, Gert Rijlaarsdam

{"title":"Learning to write syntheses: the effect of process feedback and of observing models on performance and process behaviors","authors":"Nina Vandermeulen, Elke Van Steendam, Sven De Maeyer, Marije Lesterhuis, Gert Rijlaarsdam","doi":"10.1007/s11145-023-10483-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Writing a synthesis text involves interacting reading and writing processes, serving the comprehension of source information, and its integration into a reader-friendly and accurate synthesis text. Mastering these processes requires insight into process’ orchestrations. A way of achieving this is via process feedback in which students compare their process orchestration with examples. Access to such examples of enacted process orchestration models might have an additional learning effect. In the present study we replicated and extended the study of Vandermeulen et al. ( Written Communication , 40 (1), 90–144, 2023) on the effect of keystroke logging data-based process feedback with feed-forward exemplars when compared to national baseline performances. In addition, we report the effect of a brief extension in which learners had the opportunity to observe an enacted model of their choice, showing one of three orchestrations of the initial stage of writing a synthesis task. A total of 173 10th—grade students were randomly assigned to a process feedback condition with or without added models. A baseline, consisting of a nationally representative sample of upper-secondary students’ texts and processes, served as an alternative control group. Results showed that the process feedback, both with and without observation, had a significant effect on text quality. Regarding the process data, students in the feedback condition had a more prominent focus on the sources as they spent more time in them and switched more often between text and sources, compared to the baseline. The observation task magnified this effect.","PeriodicalId":48204,"journal":{"name":"Reading and Writing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reading and Writing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-023-10483-7","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Writing a synthesis text involves interacting reading and writing processes, serving the comprehension of source information, and its integration into a reader-friendly and accurate synthesis text. Mastering these processes requires insight into process’ orchestrations. A way of achieving this is via process feedback in which students compare their process orchestration with examples. Access to such examples of enacted process orchestration models might have an additional learning effect. In the present study we replicated and extended the study of Vandermeulen et al. ( Written Communication , 40 (1), 90–144, 2023) on the effect of keystroke logging data-based process feedback with feed-forward exemplars when compared to national baseline performances. In addition, we report the effect of a brief extension in which learners had the opportunity to observe an enacted model of their choice, showing one of three orchestrations of the initial stage of writing a synthesis task. A total of 173 10th—grade students were randomly assigned to a process feedback condition with or without added models. A baseline, consisting of a nationally representative sample of upper-secondary students’ texts and processes, served as an alternative control group. Results showed that the process feedback, both with and without observation, had a significant effect on text quality. Regarding the process data, students in the feedback condition had a more prominent focus on the sources as they spent more time in them and switched more often between text and sources, compared to the baseline. The observation task magnified this effect.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

学习写综合:过程反馈和观察模型对性能和过程行为的影响

摘要综合文本的写作涉及阅读和写作过程的互动，服务于对源信息的理解，并将其整合成对读者友好、准确的综合文本。掌握这些过程需要深入了解过程的编排。实现这一目标的一种方法是通过过程反馈，学生可以将他们的过程编排与示例进行比较。访问这些制定的流程编制模型的示例可能具有额外的学习效果。在本研究中，我们复制并扩展了Vandermeulen等人的研究(《书面交流》，40(1)，90 - 144,2023)，研究了与国家基线性能相比，基于键盘记录数据的过程反馈与前瞻示例的影响。此外，我们报告了一个简短的扩展的效果，在这个扩展中，学习者有机会观察他们选择的制定模型，展示了写作综合任务初始阶段的三种编排之一。173名10年级学生被随机分配到有或没有添加模型的过程反馈条件下。一个由具有全国代表性的高中生文本和过程样本组成的基线，作为另一个对照组。结果表明，有观察和无观察的过程反馈对文本质量都有显著影响。在过程数据方面，与基线相比，反馈条件下的学生对来源的关注更加突出，因为他们花了更多的时间在这些来源上，并且更频繁地在文本和来源之间切换。观察任务放大了这种效应。

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分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Reading and Writing Multiple-

CiteScore

5.20

自引率

16.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Reading and writing skills are fundamental to literacy. Consequently, the processes involved in reading and writing and the failure to acquire these skills, as well as the loss of once well-developed reading and writing abilities have been the targets of intense research activity involving professionals from a variety of disciplines, such as neuropsychology, cognitive psychology, psycholinguistics and education. The findings that have emanated from this research are most often written up in a lingua that is specific to the particular discipline involved, and are published in specialized journals. This generally leaves the expert in one area almost totally unaware of what may be taking place in any area other than their own. Reading and Writing cuts through this fog of jargon, breaking down the artificial boundaries between disciplines. The journal focuses on the interaction among various fields, such as linguistics, information processing, neuropsychology, cognitive psychology, speech and hearing science and education. Reading and Writing publishes high-quality, scientific articles pertaining to the processes, acquisition, and loss of reading and writing skills. The journal fully represents the necessarily interdisciplinary nature of research in the field, focusing on the interaction among various disciplines, such as linguistics, information processing, neuropsychology, cognitive psychology, speech and hearing science and education. Coverage in Reading and Writing includes models of reading, writing and spelling at all age levels; orthography and its relation to reading and writing; computer literacy; cross-cultural studies; and developmental and acquired disorders of reading and writing. It publishes research articles, critical reviews, theoretical papers, and case studies. Reading and Writing is one of the most highly cited journals in Education, Educational Research, and Educational Psychology.