Source use and argumentation behavior in L1 and L2 writing: a within-writer comparison

Weijen, Daphne van; Rijlaarsdam, Gert; Bergh, Huub van den

doi:10.1007/s11145-018-9842-9

Cited by 22 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 27 publications

(70 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It can be deduced, then, that writing many words in the tasks that guide the process of construction of the text does not improve either the writing self-efficacy or the structural quality of the text, either in L1 or in L2. This finding seems to contradict the use of the number of words as a quality index of the text (Van Weijen et al, 2019), although in this study the extension refers to the text that is finally written.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 56%

Technologies for Learning Writing in L1 and L2 for the 21st Century: Effects on Writing Metacognition, Self-Efficacy and Argumentative Structuring

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim/Purpose: Quality in higher education assumes the challenge of developing in all citizens of the 21st century the cognitive, motivational, and socio-cultural dimensions that provide them with communication competences including the use of information and communication technologies, for the dissemination of sustainable scientific knowledge in different languages. Hence this paper evaluates a didactic-technological process called “Ensayo Científico Multilingüe” or ECM (“Multilingual Scientific Essay”), which guides the construction of argumentative texts in a shared didactic space in the native language (L1) and in the first foreign language (L2). Background: Although the use of information and communication technologies (ICTs) in educational contexts stands out as an index of quality, some studies indicate that these technologies, by themselves, do not produce changes in learning. The possibility that ICTs can contribute to a university-quality education is by providing measures that allow verification of the effects on the real improvement of the learning of communication competences of students and, especially, in the learning of written communication for the purpose of scientific dissemination. In order to do so, this research is based on the Metasociocognitive Written Composition (MWC) model that explains university writing as a complex process in which, metacognitively, cognitive-linguistic competences and socio-cultural experiences interact with motivational factors to achieve outreach objectives within a disciplinary field. This interaction always takes place by applying a specific textual genre. Methodology: For this research, a mixed quasi-experimental research design was proposed, with a control and an experimental group with 50 university students in each group. This design included two repeated measures (pre-test, post-test) for three dependent variables: (i) metacognition of writing; (ii) self-efficacy of argumentative writing; and (iii) structuring of the argumentative essay, in both L1 and L2. Validated instruments were selected and the correlations between the variables described both before and after the application of the ECM, in L1 and L2, as well as their correlations with the didactic-technological procedures integrated in the ECM: written activities, their extension, languages used, Lesson and Forums. Contribution: This article analyses the didactic-technological procedures that may be influencing the improvement in the learning of argumentative writing, both in L1 and L2, with validity and reliability. This enables the establishment of technological strategies for teaching shared in L1 and L2, both real and contrasted. Findings: It can be stated that the ECM creates a shared didactic-technological space in different languages, producing similar effects in L1 and L2, both on writing metacognition and on self-efficacy and argumentative structuring. The ECM enhances the association of writing metacognition with argumentative self-efficacy in L1 and L2. However, these dimensions are not associated with the structuring of argumentative essays, either in L1 or in L2. Furthermore, it is verified that the described variables are associated with the didactic-technological procedures integrated in the ECM in the following ways: (i) the procedure to promote writing metacognition (through the Lesson tool) is associated with argumentative structuring in L2; (ii) the extent of writing activities is associated, only, with argumentative self-efficacy in L1; and (iii) participation in the Forums presents a very low association with all the variables measured. Recommendations for Practitioners: The present study promotes the application of the ECM by introducing changes in the procedures to improve its effectiveness in argumentative writing learning of a scientific nature, in L1 and L2. In this sense, it is proposed: (i) to adapt and implement the genre-based writing instructions methodology to the technological context; (ii) incorporate more collaborative technologies in the construction of the text; and (iii) reduce the number of forums and replace the extensive activities with micro activities. Recommendation for Researchers: Present the ECM in an open mode that allows access to international students and, thus, to be able to validate the instruments in different languages, checking its effects with a diversity of groups. Impact on Society: The results of this research show that it is possible to promote the learning of argumentative writing in L1 and L2 from the first year of university, sharing didactic-technological learning spaces. The potential of ICT to help students manage and acquire better scientific writing skills in different languages and its positive results to meet the needs of students, both in L1 and L2, is especially demonstrated. In short, the procedures, resources, applications, and tools integrated in a didactic process are described, demonstrating their effectiveness, for the development of communicative competences of scientific dissemination. Undoubtedly, this contributes to a quality higher education, so demanded internationally, for the creation of a culture of peace and cooperation that enables sustainable global development. Future Research: Another line of research that is being developed in the future is the adaptation of ECM to the teaching of other genres and educational levels, as well as for the integration of people with functional diversity and immigrants.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 56%

Technologies for Learning Writing in L1 and L2 for the 21st Century: Effects on Writing Metacognition, Self-Efficacy and Argumentative Structuring

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Language proficiency may also affect how students write with sources. L2 students may be more likely to stay close to the original text, possibly because of difficulty in comprehension (Cumming et al 2018;van Weijen, Rijlaarsdam, and van den Bergh 2019). This can be problematic in history, in which original interpretation is valued.…”

Section: The Potential Role Of Reading and Writing Proficiency In Source-based Writingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Historical reasoning in an undergraduate CLIL course: students’ progression and the role of language proficiency

Sendur

Drie

Boxtel

et al. 2020

International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a study of undergraduate L2 students participating in a Content and Language Integrated Learning historical reasoning course, we examined students' changing performance on historical reasoning and how this was affected by their English reading and writing proficiency. Students engaged in written historical reasoning when answering a historical question by using sources and heuristics such as historical contextualization and corroboration. The course was designed based on principles likely to enhance historical reasoning and second language acquisition, and included an overt focus on language form. We found that students were able to reason historically at an emerging level of proficiency. The markers of historical reasoning present in their writing were neither significantly flawed nor highly proficient. A latent growth curve analysis was used to investigate the effect of students' English language proficiency on their source-based writing and the changes in their reasoning over the duration of the course. We found that students' English proficiency level did not predict either their reasoning or changes in their performance during the course. Students at differing levels of English proficiency improved similarly.

show abstract

“…There are also reported differences in source integration between L1 and L2 writers during argumentative synthesis writing. For instance, studies have reported that L1 writers include more citations than L2 writers (Borg, 2000;van Weijen et al, 2019) and that citations that involve quotations are longer in L1 writing compared to L2 writing (Borg, 2000). Research also reports that when L2 writers do integrate text from the source, they seem to borrow more direct strings of words and are less likely to properly cite the source than L1 writers (Shi, 2004;van Weijen et al, 2019).…”

Section: Source Synthesis and Writing Proficiencymentioning

confidence: 99%

Source inclusion in synthesis writing: an NLP approach to understanding argumentation, sourcing, and essay quality

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Synthesis writing is widely taught across domains and serves as an important means of assessing writing ability, text comprehension, and content learning. Synthesis writing differs from other types of writing in terms of both cognitive and task demands because it requires writers to integrate information across source materials. However, little is known about how integration of source material may influence overall writing quality for synthesis tasks. This study examined approximately 900 source-based essays written in response to four different synthesis prompts which instructed writers to use information from the sources to illustrate and support their arguments and clearly indicate from which sources they were drawing (i.e., citation use). The essays were then scored by expert raters for holistic quality, argumentation, and source use/inferencing. Hand-crafted natural language processing (NLP) features and pre-existing NLP tools were used to examine semantic and keyword overlap between the essays and the source texts, plagiarism from the source texts, and instances of source citation and quoting. These variables along with text length and prompt were then used to predict essays scores. Results reported strong models for predicting human ratings that explained between 47 and 52% of the variance in scores. The results indicate that text length was the strongest predictor of score but also that more successful writers include stronger, semantically-related information from the source, provide more citations and do so later in the text, and copy less from the text. This work introduces the use of NLP techniques to assess source integration, provides details on the types of source integration used by writers, and highlights the effects of source integration on writing quality.

show abstract

Source use and argumentation behavior in L1 and L2 writing: a within-writer comparison

Cited by 22 publications

References 27 publications

Technologies for Learning Writing in L1 and L2 for the 21st Century: Effects on Writing Metacognition, Self-Efficacy and Argumentative Structuring

Technologies for Learning Writing in L1 and L2 for the 21st Century: Effects on Writing Metacognition, Self-Efficacy and Argumentative Structuring

Historical reasoning in an undergraduate CLIL course: students’ progression and the role of language proficiency

Source inclusion in synthesis writing: an NLP approach to understanding argumentation, sourcing, and essay quality

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About