1887
Volume 156, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0019-0829
  • E-ISSN: 1783-1490
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

In this paper we use keystroke logging to examine the development of fluency and revision in high school L1 Swedish and L2 English writing. Each writer wrote one text in English and one in Swedish in each year of the study. Using a combination of statistical and automatic analyses of the keystroke log, we attempted to investigate: i) how the on-line writing process in terms of revising, pausing and fluency in first and second language writing changes over time, ii) whether there are on-line writing process variables which can be identified as contributing to text improvement, and iii) whether there are any aspects of L1 writing which can be identified as contributing to L2 writing and learning processes and which may form part of a teaching programme. Previous studies of L2 writers have attested to changes in fluency, pause and revision behaviour, and amount of text produced, although associations with the quality of the final output are not clearly supported. The within-writer comparison of this study addresses differences in fluency, pause and revision behaviour between L1 and L2 writing. A regression analysis looking at quality and two types of revision (Form, and Conceptual) found that form revision frequency was related to the language of writing and that conceptual revision frequency was dependent on linguistic experience rather than on language. The findings suggest that conceptual revision and writing skills are transferred from the L1 to the L2, and that these skills should be taught accordingly.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.2143/ITL.156.0.2034428
2008-01-01
2019-10-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Allal, L.
    (2000) Metacognitive regulation of writing in the classroom. InA. Camps & M. Milian (Eds.), Metalinguistic Activity in Learning to Write (pp.145–166). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M.
    (1987) The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bosher, S.
    (1998) The composing processes of three Southeast Asian writers at the post-secondary level: an exploratory study. Journal of Second Language Writing, 2, 205–241.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Chanquoy, L.
    (2001) How to make it easier for children to revise their writing: A study of text revision from 3rd to 5th grades. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 15–41.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Chanquoy, L., Foulin, J. N., & Fayol, M.
    (1996) Writing in adults: a real-time approach. InG. Rijlaarsdam, H. van den Bergh, & M. Couzijn (Eds), Current research in writing: Theories, models and methodology (pp36–43). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Chenoweth, N. A., & Hayes, J. R.
    (2001) Fluency in writing: Generating text in L1 and L2. Written Communication, 18 (1), 80 - 98.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Faigley, L., & Witte, S.
    (1981) Analyzing revision. College Composition and Communication, 32, 400–414.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Flower, L. & Hayes, J.
    (1981) A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 22, 365–387.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Graham, S., Berninger, V. W., Abbot, R. D. Abbot, S. P., & Whitaker, D.
    (1997) Role of mechanics in composing of elementary school children: a new methodological approach. Journal of Educational psychology, 89(1), 170–182.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Graham, S., & Harris, K. R.
    (2000) The role of self-regulation and transcription skills in writing and writing development. Educational Psychologist, 35(1), 3–12.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Hayes, J. R.
    (1996) A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing. InC. M. Levy, & S. Ransdell (Eds.) The Science of Writing: Theories, methods, individual differences and applications (pp.1–27). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Jacobs, H.I., Zingraf, S.A., Wormuth, D.R., Hartfiel, V.F. & Hughey, J.B.
    (1981) Testing ESL Composition: a practical approach. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Jakobsen, A. L.
    (2006) Research methods in translation—Translog. InG. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.) and K. P. H. Sullivan, & E. Lindgren. (Vol. Eds.), Studies in Writing, Vol.18, Computer Keystroke Logging-Methods and Applications (pp.95–105). Oxford: Elsevier.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Janssen, D., van Waes, L., & van den Bergh, H.
    (1996) Effects of thinking aloud on writing processes. InC. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.). The Science of Writing (pp.233–250). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Kollberg, P.
    (1998) S-notation - A Computer Based Method for Studying and Representing Text Composition. Licentiate thesis, Stockholm: Department of Numerical Analysis and Computing Science, Royal Institute of Technology (KTH).
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Leijten, M., & van Waes, L.
    (2006) Inputlog: New perspectives on the logging of on-line writing processes in a Windows environment. InG. Rijlaardam (Series Ed.) andK. P. H. Sullivan, & E. Lindgren (Eds.), Studies in Writing, Vol.18, Computer key-stroke logging: Methods and applications, (pp.73–93). Oxford: Elsevier.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Lindgren, E.
    (2004) The uptake of peer-intervention in the writing classroom. InG. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.) and G. Rijlaarsdam, van den Bergh, H. & Couzijn, M. (Volume Eds.) Studies in Writing, Volume14, Effective teaching and learning of writing, (pp.259–272). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Lindgren, E., & Sullivan, K.P.H.
    (2003) Stimulated recall as a trigger for increasing noticing and language awareness in the L2 writing classroom: A case study of two young female writers. Language Awareness, 12, 172–186.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. (2006) Analysing on-line revision. InG. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.) and K.P.H. Sullivan, & E. Lindgren, (Volume Eds.), Studies in Writing, Vol.18, Computer key-stroke logging: Methods and applications (pp.157–188). Oxford, England: Elsevier.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Lindgren, E. & Sullivan, K. P. H.
    (2006) Writing and the analysis of revision: An overviewInG. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.) and K. P. H. Sullivan, & E. Lindgren. (Vol. Eds.), Studies in Writing, Vol.18, Computer Keystroke Logging-Methods and Applications, (31–44). Oxford: Elsevier.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Matsuhashi, A.
    (1981) Pausing and planning: The tempo of written discourse production. Research in the Teaching of English, 15, 113–134.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. (1987) Writing in real time: Modeling production processes. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. McCutchen, D.
    (1996) Acapacity theory of writing: Working memory in composition. Educational Psychology Review, 8 (3), 299–325.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. (2000) Knowledge, processing, and working memory: Implications for a theory of writing. Educational Psychologist, 35(1), 13–23.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Phinney, M., & Khouri, S.
    (1993) Computers, revision, and ESL writers: the role of experience. Journal of Second Language Writing, 213, 257–277.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Rijlaarsdam, G., Couzijn, M., & van den Bergh, H.
    (2004) The study of revision as a writing process and as a learning-to-write process. Two prospective research agendas. InG. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.) and L. Allal, L. Chanquoy, & P. Largy (Volume Eds). Revision: cognitive and instructional processes (pp.21–38) Dordecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Schilperoord, J.
    (1996) The distribution of pause time in written text production. InG. Rijlaarsdam, H. van den Bergh, & M. Couzijn (Eds.), Current research in writing: Theories, models and methodology (pp.21–35). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Schoonen, R., van Gelderen, A., de Glopper, K., Hulstijn, J., Simis, A., Snellings, P., & Stevenson, M.
    (2003) First language and second language writing: The role of linguistic knowledge, speed of processing and metacognitive knowledge. Language Learning, 53 (1), 165–202.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Severinson Eklundh, K., & Kollberg, P.
    (1996) Computer tools for tracing the writing process: from keystroke records to S-notation. InG. Rijlaarsdam, H. van den Bergh, & M. Couzijn, M. (Eds.), Current Research in writing: Theories, models and methodology (pp.526–541). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Spelman Miller, K., & Sullivan, K. P. H.
    (2006) Keystroke logging: an introduction. InG. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.) and K. P. H. Sullivan, & E. Lindgren (Volume Eds.). Studies in Writing, Volume 18, Computer key-stroke logging: Methods and applications (pp.1–9). Oxford, England: Elsevier.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Spelman Miller, K., Lindgren, E., Sullivan, K.P.H.
    (2008) The psycholinguistic dimension in second language writing: Opportunities for research and pedagogy using computer keystroke logging, TESOL QUARTERLYVolume: 42lssue: 3Pages: 433–454.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Stevenson, M.
    (2005) Reading and writing in a foreign language: A comparison of conceptual and linguistic processes in Dutch and English. Unpublished doctoral thesis. University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Stevenson, M., Schoonen, R., & De Glopper, K.
    (2006) Revising in two languages: a multidimensional comparison of online writing revisions in L1 and FL. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 201–233.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Strömqvist, S., & Ahlsén, E.
    (Eds.) (1999) The Process of Writing: a progress report. (Gothenburg papers in Theoretical Linguistics, 83) Göteborg University, Göteborg, Sweden: Department of Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Strömqvist, S. & Karlsson, H.
    (2002) ScriptLog for Windows - User’s Manual. Technical Report. University of Lund: Department of Linguistics, and University College of Stavanger: Centre for Reading Research.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Strömqvist, S., Holmqvist, K., Johansson, V., Karlsson, H., & Wengelin, A.
    (2006) What keystroke logging can reveal about writing. InG. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.) and K. P. H. Sullivan, & E. Lindgren (Volume Eds.). Studies in Writing, Volume 18, Computer key-stroke logging: Methods and applications (45–71). Oxford: Elsevier.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Sullivan, K. P. H., & Lindgren, E.
    (2002) Self-assessment in autonomous computer-aided L2 writing. ELT Journal, 56, 258–266.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. (Eds.) (2006) Computer key-stroke logging: Methods and applications. Oxford: Elsevier.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Sullivan, K.P.H., Lindgren, E., & Mellenius, I.M.
    (in press 2008/2009) Att studera skrivande med hjälp av loggning [Using logging to study writing]. InR. Domeij (Ed.) Tekniken bakom språket [The technology behind the language], Stockholm, Sweden. Norstedts akademiska förlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Whalen, K., & Ménard, N.
    (1995) L1 and L2 writers’ strategic and linguistic knowledge: A model of multiple-level discourse processing. Language Learning, 44 (3), 381–418.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.2143/ITL.156.0.2034428
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error