- Type
- Single Paper
- Time
- 09:00 - 10:30
- Room
- SM O1.13 (Lecture Room)
Session Information
This page shows the session details and the presentations assigned to this session.
LONG-TERM MEMORY RESOURCES AND ESSAY QUALITY IN ESL GHANAIAN STUDENTS’ WRITING
Abstract
While existing literature establishes some relationships between language proficiency and the linguistic dimensions of essay quality, there is a dearth of research on the links between long-term memory resources as a whole and the non-linguistic aspects of essay quality. The current research, therefore, examined the influence of linguistic, genre and topic knowledge on the content and organisation quality of students’ essays in senior high schools in Ghana, from the lenses of a conceptual framework primarily drawn from Flower and Hayes (1981) and Hayes (1996). The study used a convergent parallel mixed-methods design, and was based on 262 randomly sampled students, who took a pre-writing test of linguistic knowledge, wrote an argumentative essay, and responded to a post-writing questionnaire for genre and topic knowledge. Data were analysed using regression analyses and comparative content analysis procedures. The findings show that the three resources jointly made statistically significant positive contributions to both content and organisation quality of the essays. Among them, linguistic knowledge emerged as the strongest positive predictor of content quality, while genre knowledge made the strongest contribution to organisation quality. The qualitative findings also substantiated the quantitative results, showing marked differences between essays written by high- and low-resource participants across introductions, body paragraphs, and conclusions. The overall convergence of the qualitative and quantitative results confirms that students’ content and organisational performance in ESL writing is strongly shaped by the interaction of linguistic, genre, and topic knowledge resources. These results extend L2 writing theory by foregrounding the crucial role played by long-term memory in L2 writing performance. The findings also call for pedagogical approaches that simultaneously scaffold language use, model genre-specific rhetorical structures, and support learners’ access to relevant content knowledge before and during writing.
Strategies for Open Writing Tasks in the fide Test at CEFR Levels A2 and B1
Abstract
“Strategies for Open Writing Tasks in the fide Test at CEFR Levels A2 and B1: An Exploratory Study”The goal of this study is to reconstruct the writing process in German as a second language and to analyse which goal-directed cognitive and procedural operations are activated. It includes a process-oriented approach to writing in the L2 – a perspective that is underrepresented in writing research (Arras 2013: 75, Heine 2014: 123). The research question is, “What strategies are elicited by the specific requirements/demands of the three open writing tasks in the high stakes fide model test (CEFR A2/B1)?” Three hypotheses were formulated:the type of writing task influences the use of specific strategies;individual differences emerge in the breadth and configuration of strategy use;construct-irrelevant strategies are activated during writing.A between-method triangulation (Denzin 1970: 308–309) was used to answer the research questions, combining the think-aloud method during task performance with retrospective interviews to get a holistic view of the writing process and strategies. Transcripts with six participants (out of a total of thirteen) with Polish as their L1 were analyzed using qualitative content analysis (Kuckartz & Rädiker 2022: 129). The dataset consisted of 18 think-aloud protocols and 6 interview transcripts. The analysis revealed a repertoire of four strategies that predominated across all open writing tasks: a) formulating or translating from the L1, b) detailed reading of task instructions, generating detailed plans, and c) paraphrasing (H1). The study revealed inter- and intra-individual variation in the scope, configuration, and sequencing of strategies (H2). Moreover, the results indicated that participants incorporated extended verbatim passages from input texts and task instructions into their own texts to improve their text quality. This led to a reduction of their own formulations, and to an increasingly reproductive character (Peresisch 2025: 224) (H3). The results provide possible implications for writing pedagogy in L2 contexts. These include fostering learners’ orientation towards the task environment, fostering process awareness, and promoting a learning-supportive integration of artificial intelligence into the writing process. The results also include a critical reflection on the construct and test validity of the fide test.
The Working Memory-Writing Connection: Meta-Analytic Evidence
Abstract
The Working Memory-Writing Connection: Meta-Analytic EvidenceAim: This meta-analysis examined the relation between working memory and written composition and whether this relation is moderated by several factors.Theoretical Framework: Writing requires simultaneous management of idea generation, organization, sentence construction, word selection, transcription, and evaluation. Theoretical models—including the cognitive model of writing (Hayes & Flower, 1981), the not-so-simple view of writing (Berninger & Winn, 2006), and the Direct and Indirect Effects Model of Writing (Kim, 2020)—consistently identify working memory as critical for writing. However, the magnitude of this relation and potential moderators remain unclear.Method: We searched five electronic databases (e.g., APA PsycInfo, Academic Search Ultimate, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global). Inclusion criteria: (1) participants aged 5+ years without severe sensory, behavioral, cognitive, or intellectual disabilities; (2) assessment of both working memory and written composition at sentence and/or paragraph level; (3) zero-order correlations, standardized regression coefficients, or sufficient data to compute effect sizes; (4) published in English.Findings: We analyzed 84 studies with 975 effect sizes from 16,747 participants. The overall weighted correlation between working memory and written composition was .27. Two key moderators emerged: (1) the relation was significantly stronger in secondary schools than elementary schools, and (2) verbal working memory showed stronger relations than visuospatial working memory with writing outcomes.Relevance: Although working memory's theoretical importance for writing is widely recognized, this is the first comprehensive meta-analysis quantifying this relation and identifying moderators. Findings have implications for writing theory and instruction.ReferencesBerninger, V. W., & Winn, W. D. (2006). Implications of advancements in brain research and technology for writing development, writing instruction, and educational evolution. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 96–114). Guilford Press.Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. (1981). A cognitive proces theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365-387. Kim, Y.-S. G. (2020). Structural relations of language, cognitive skills, and topic knowledge to written composition: A test of the direct and indirect effects model of writing (DIEW). British Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 910-932.