Variability as predictor in L2 writing proficiency

Huang, Ting; Steinkrauss, Rasmus; Verspoor, Marjolijn

doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2020.100787

Cited by 14 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, we found some evidence in favor of gradual progression from coordination to subordination with development; in our intermediate subset, learners moved from reliance on coordination to using more subordinate structures over the course of the program. Although these findings align with the results and conclusions of some previous studies (Huang et al, 2021;Mazgutova & Kormos, 2015;Polat et al, 2020), we make this conclusion with caution, given that our sample in this analysis included only intermediate learners.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…In line with previous research (Bulté & Housen, 2014;Crossley & McNamara, 2014;Huang et al, 2021;Yang et al, 2015), to investigate the relationships between the complexity indices and the program's curricular levels for RQ2 and the relationships between the complexity indices and WPT scores for RQ3, we conducted correlation and multiple linear regression analyses. An a priori power analysis for multiple regression was conducted to determine an adequate sample size for models with a desired power level of .8, a significance threshold of p = .05, an anticipated large effect size of .60, and nine predictors (these nine predictors for RQs 2 and 3 were identified in RQ1).…”

Section: Analysis Summarymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Measuring Writing Development and Proficiency Gains Using Indices of Lexical and Syntactic Complexity: Evidence From Longitudinal Russian Learner Corpus Data

Kisselev

SOYAN

PASTUSHENKOV

et al. 2022

The Modern Language Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Linguistic complexity serves as an important measure of second language (L2) writing development. Complexity indices, however, rarely feature in the studies of learner languages other than English. Additionally, L2 writing studies have been criticized for the lack of consistency in defining proficiency. The current study addresses these gaps by exploring writing development in a less commonly studied language (i.e., Russian) while paying attention to the operationalization of proficiency. We analyzed lexical and syntactic complexity indices in a corpus of essays written by learners at different levels at the beginning and the end of an instructional program. Our analyses demonstrate that 9 complexity indices (i.e., mean word length, type–token ratio, percentage of high‐frequency words, mean sentence length, clauses per sentence, syntactic depth, proportion of subordinate clauses, and proportion of relative clauses) changed significantly over the course of the program; the same 9 indices showed significant correlation with the initial curricular placement, and all—with the exception of clauses per sentence—modestly or highly correlated with the final rating on the proficiency test. The findings confirm the usefulness of complexity measures in tracking writing development in L2 Russian.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Analysis Summarymentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring Writing Development and Proficiency Gains Using Indices of Lexical and Syntactic Complexity: Evidence From Longitudinal Russian Learner Corpus Data

Kisselev

SOYAN

PASTUSHENKOV

et al. 2022

The Modern Language Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It has been shown that a learner's performance fluctuates when measured with both specific and holistic measures (Spoelman & Verspoor, 2010;Tilma, 2014;Verspoor et al, 2008;Verspoor et al, 2017). Research has also demonstrated that learners whose language exhibits substantial variability may be more successful than their less-variable peers (Chan et al, 2015;Huang et al, 2021;Lowie & Verspoor, 2019).…”

Section: Tracing L2 Learners' Language Constructions: a Dub Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Variation and variability in L2 learning trajectories: Learning the Finnish existential construction

Lesonen

Steinkrauss

Suni

et al. 2022

Journal of the European Second Language Association

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Taking an onomasiological approach and a dynamic usage-based perspective, this study explores how four beginning L2 learners of Finnish develop in expressing existentiality ('there is something somewhere') before and after instruction. Data were collected weekly over a period of nine months and examined for conventionalized and non-conventionalized constructions that express existentiality. As expected from a dynamic usage-based perspective, both inter-individual variation and intra-individual variability were identified. The initial repertoires of two of the learners were quite variable, as they used several different non-conventionalized constructions before settling on more conventionalized ones. In contrast, the two other learners did not independently try out different ways of expressing the targeted meaning but started to use the conventionalized Finnish existential construction only after pedagogical intervention. As one would expect from a usage-based perspective, some learners' initial repertoires included some item-based constructions that were similar to each other. As far as instruction is concerned, for all learners there was an increase in the use of the conventionalized construction after an explicit intervention, but the use was not morphologically accurate. The findings confirm two commonly held hypotheses in dynamic systems approaches: Learners own their own learning trajectories and initial trajectories are sometimes characterized by high degrees of variability because learners need to try out different strategies before they can adapt to the requirements of the new situation.

show abstract

“…Until now, CAF studies based on CDST have always focused on an individual's language development rather than affording the same amount of attention to macro-level group averages as traditional approaches do. Some studies treat CAF as a holistic system (e.g., Larsen-Freeman, 2006;Norris and Ortega, 2009;Verspoor et al, 2012;Polat and Kim, 2014;Li and Sui, 2017;Bai and Ye, 2018;Lowie and Verspoor, 2019;Huang et al, 2021;Verspoor and de Bot, 2021). For example, Larsen-Freeman (2006) investigated the development of grammatical complexity, lexical complexity, accuracy, and fluency of five Chinese EFL learners over 4 months, from the perspective of CDST.…”

Section: Empirical Research On Complexity Accuracy and Fluency Based ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Five kinds of CAF trajectories were identified, including "peaks/valleys, " "ascending in curve, " "descending in curve, " "quasi-horizontal line, " and "mixed mode" (Li and Sui, 2017, p. 392). Meanwhile, other studies have examined how variability drives L2 development (e.g., de Bot et al, 2007;Lowie and Verspoor, 2019;Huang et al, 2021;Verspoor and de Bot, 2021). For example, in research by Lowie and Verspoor (2019), the degree of variability was conceptualized by a coefficient of variation and calculated as standard deviation divided by the mean of the holistic rating score of language proficiency (i.e., complexity, accuracy, and fluency).…”

Section: Empirical Research On Complexity Accuracy and Fluency Based ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Dynamic Systems Study on Complexity, Accuracy, and Fluency in English Writing Development by Chinese University Students

Zhang

2022

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated the development of lexical complexity, sentence complexity, accuracy, and fluency in the English writing of 22 Chinese university students from the perspective of Complex Dynamic Systems Theory (CDST). Compositions were assigned 30 times over the course of one academic year through Pigaiwang, an online platform that automatically evaluates writing. A modified retrodictive modeling approach was adopted. Specifically, a longitudinal cluster analysis was used to examine emergent prototypes. A moving correlation analysis and retrodictive interviews were conducted to study the signature dynamics that produce each prototype. At each collection, the 22 student compositions were classified into two clusters. One cluster contained those students who performed better than average in accuracy, but worse in the other three variables. The other cluster comprised those students with the opposite performance. Students moved continuously between the two clusters; and their change trajectories can be categorized into three prototypes: a continuously stable type, an initially variable and then stable type, and a continuously variable type. Case studies of three students representing the three emergent prototypes indicated that the signature dynamics for the three prototypes were related to dynamic interactions among different variables and dynamic changes in affect-related elements in the form of writing interests, motivation, and strategies. The initial conditions and the feedback from Pigaiwang acted as key control parameters in shaping the prototypes. The continuously variable prototype developed their writing proficiency to the greatest extent and had the most variability. Based upon the findings, implications for teaching L2 writing are discussed.

show abstract

Variability as predictor in L2 writing proficiency

Cited by 14 publications

References 48 publications

Measuring Writing Development and Proficiency Gains Using Indices of Lexical and Syntactic Complexity: Evidence From Longitudinal Russian Learner Corpus Data

Measuring Writing Development and Proficiency Gains Using Indices of Lexical and Syntactic Complexity: Evidence From Longitudinal Russian Learner Corpus Data

Variation and variability in L2 learning trajectories: Learning the Finnish existential construction

A Dynamic Systems Study on Complexity, Accuracy, and Fluency in English Writing Development by Chinese University Students

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About