In order to design effective instruction and feedback for synthesis writing on both writing processes and products, a clear insight into synthesis writing processes underlying a high-quality synthesis text is crucial. That is why this study, as one of the first, examines the use of sources during synthesis writing processes, and its effect on text quality. The writing processes of 294 Dutch secondary students (grade 10-12) were logged using keystroke logging software Inputlog. Two different synthesis text genres were investigated of which three source-related process measures were analysed: the relative time spent in the sources, the transitions per minute between the sources, and the transitions per minute between the synthesis text and the sources. First, the study explored the effect of temporal distribution and genre (argumentative or informative synthesis) on the writing process, providing insights into the distribution of source-related writing activities over the process intervals and the possible influence of genre on this distribution. Secondly, the individual source-related process measures were linked to text quality. Thirdly, via polynomial regression analyses, the various source-related activities and their temporal distribution were taken into account in an integrated way to identify patterns of effective source use. These patterns vary across genre and explain a considerable amount of variance in the data (24.6% for argumentative synthesis texts, 16.2% for informative synthesis texts). Our findings can be used to develop process-oriented feedback, giving students an insight into their synthesis writing process.

No abstract

No abstract

In this study we examine process configurations in synthesis tasks. We study whether these configurations are students traits or vary within students per task. In a national survey with a representative sample of 658 Dutch upper-secondary school students, we collected writing tasks, registered students’ writing behaviors (via keylogging) and their task perceptions and assessed the quality of their texts. Each participant completed two informative and two argumentative synthesis tasks. Writing process configurations were based on a preselected set of writing behaviors that proved to be related to text quality: time spent on sources and production activities, switching between sources and between sources and text production, and speed of production; with reference to the phase in the process (first, mid, final part). Latent profile analyses distilled four process configurations, some of which were more likely to occur with the informative genre. One process configuration, that is, “Fast text production,” was related to qualitatively higher text quality scores than the others. Additionally, at the age of 16–18 a writing process configuration is not a student trait: in most instances, we observed two or more task configurations within students. Writers' task experiences such as topic knowledge and topic interest predicted the occurrence of certain process configurations which could indicate adaptivity. The finding that writing configurations of writers vary even between similar tasks has important implications for the generalizability of (synthesis) writing research on the basis of a single writing task and process per student.