Trang 2
EDUCATION IN A COMPETITIVE AND GLOBALIZING WORLD WRITING: PROCESSES, TOOLS AND TECHNIQUES No part of this digital document may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means. The publisher has taken reasonable care in the preparation of this digital document, but makes no expressed or implied warranty of any kind and assumes no responsibility for any errors or omissions. No liability is assumed for incidental or consequential damages in connection with or arising out of information contained herein. This digital document is sold with the clear understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, medical or any other professional services. ThiNganHang.com ThiNganHang.com
Trang 3
EDUCATION IN A COMPETITIVE AND GLOBALIZING WORLD Additional books in this series can be found on Nova‘s website at: https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/index.php?cPath=23_29&seriesp= Education+in+a+Competitive+and+Globalizing+World Additional e-books in this series can be found on Nova‘s website at: https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/index.php?cPath=23_29&seriespe= Education+in+a+Competitive+and+Globalizing+World ThiNganHang.com ThiNganHang.com
Trang 4
EDUCATION IN A COMPETITIVE AND GLOBALIZING WORLD WRITING: PROCESSES, TOOLS AND TECHNIQUES NATHAN L. MERTENS EDITOR ThiNganHang.com Nova Science Publishers, Inc. New York ThiNganHang.com
Trang 5
Copyright © 2010 by Nova Science Publishers, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means: electronic, electrostatic, magnetic, tape, mechanical photocopying, recording or otherwise without the written permission of the Publisher. For permission to use material from this book please contact us: Telephone 631-231-7269; Fax 631-231-8175 Web Site: http://www.novapublishers.com NOTICE TO THE READER The Publisher has taken reasonable care in the preparation of this book, but makes no expressed or implied warranty of any kind and assumes no responsibility for any errors or omissions. No liability is assumed for incidental or consequential damages in connection with or arising out of information contained in this book. The Publisher shall not be liable for any special, consequential, or exemplary damages resulting, in whole or in part, from the readers‘ use of, or reliance upon, this material. Any parts of this book based on government reports are so indicated and copyright is claimed for those parts to the extent applicable to compilations of such works. Independent verification should be sought for any data, advice or recommendations contained in this book. In addition, no responsibility is assumed by the publisher for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from any methods, products, instructions, ideas or otherwise contained in this publication. This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information with regard to the subject matter covered herein. It is sold with the clear understanding that the Publisher is not engaged in rendering legal or any other professional services. If legal or any other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent person should be sought. FROM A DECLARATION OF PARTICIPANTS JOINTLY ADOPTED BY A COMMITTEE OF THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION AND A COMMITTEE OF PUBLISHERS. LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOGING-IN-PUBLICATION DATA Writing : processes, tools and techniques / editor, Nathan L. Mertens.Includes index.p. cm.ThiNganHang.com ISBN 978-1-61728-235-5 (eBook) 1. English language--Composition and exercises--Study and teaching. 2. Motivation in education. I. Mertens, Nathan L. LB1576.W748 2010 808'.0071--dc22 2010012264 Published by Nova Science Publishers, Inc. New York ThiNganHang.com
Trang 6
CONTENTS Preface vii Chapter 1 Methods, Techniques, and Tools for the On-line Study of the Writing Process 1 Thierry Olive Chapter 2 Stepwise Computer-Based Scaffolding for Academic Writing: How It Affects Writing Activities, Performance, and Motivation 19 Antje Proske Chapter 3 Readability Formulae, Cloze Tests, and Computerized Textual Analysis for Testing Language Skills: Are They Useful? 39 John Ludbrook Chapter 4 Strategies, Tools and Techniques for the Development of Written Communication Metasociocognitive Processes 57 Rosario Arroyo González and Coral Ivy Hunt Gómez Chapter 5 Self-Assessment and Learning to Write 75 Heidi L. Andrade and Georgia C. Brooke Chapter 6 How Busy Clinicians Can Write Scholarly Papers 91 John E. Mullinax, Jonathan M. Hernandez, Sharona B. Ross, Linda K. Barry and Alexander S. Rosemurgy, Chapter 7 Teaching Undergraduates to Write Publishable Material 101 John P. Canal Chapter 8 Breaking the Rules: Writing Reflectively for Yourself 109 Chapter 9ThiNganHang.comJohn CowanDeveloping the Self-Regulation of Writing Process in Studentswith Learning Disabilities 115 Jesús-Nicasio García and Raquel Fidalgo Chapter 10 Cognitive Strategic and Self-Regulated Instruction in Writing Processes 129 Raquel Fidalgo, Olga Arias-Gundín, Jesús Nicasio García and Mark Torrance Index 153 ThiNganHang.com
Trang 8
PREFACE Writing is a complex and cognitively demanding activity. To be successful, writers need an understanding of the components of a quality test as well as knowledge of writing strategies that can be used to shape and organize the writing process. This new book discusses academic writing as a complex task which involves a variety of cognitive and metacognitive activities; a model for teaching writing strategies and the sociocultural processes of written communication; rubric-referenced self-assessment and the quality of elementary and middle- school students' writing and self-efficacy and others. Chapter 1- In the field of writing studies, the shift between the product-oriented approach to the process-oriented one has resulted not only in conceptual changes in the theories of writing, but also in development of methods and techniques that have enabled us to study the writing process. These real-time or on-line methods track the writing processes while they are operating in order to describe their time course and their functional characteristics. Generally, these methods focus on three features of writing: writing fluency through the analyses of pauses and execution periods, functional characteristics of the writing processes with thinking-aloud techniques, and their demands on working memory with dual-task designs. The most common tools used for that purpose are computers with digitizing tablets and keystroke recording programs. Moreover, recently, a new perspective has been opened by the analysis of the writer‘s eye movement coupled to the analysis of the on-going text. Some scarce research has also attempted to investigate writing with brain imagery techniques. All these methods are shedding light on the cognitive operations necessary to compose a text. Consequently, the aim of this chapter is to provide readers with an overview of these methodsThiNganHang.com and tools in order to figure out how to conceptualize and design new experiments. In parallel, through the presentation of these methods and of the tools that are required to implement them, this chapter also delineates the issues that are currently addressed in research on writing. Chapter 2- Academic writing is a complex task that involves a variety of cognitive and metacognitive activities. One approach to assist writers in dealing with the problem of managing their resources during writing is to scaffold writing by computer. Unfortunately, empirical research on computer-based scaffolding (CBS) of writing is quite limited, and the results are mixed. An explanation for these results may be found in the design of the scaffolding. Most CBS support discrete writing activities, independently from the writing process. This chapter seeks to contribute to the question of how to design CBS which supports the academic writing process as a whole. As a basis for the design, the subtask ThiNganHang.com
Trang 9
viii Nathan L. Mertens model of academic writing is presented which explicitly describes the demands of academic writing. This model is derived from theoretical and empirical findings on expert writing. The implementation of CBS for expert writing activities into the writing environment escribo is then described. The CBS stepwise supports the application of these expert writing activities. To this end, escribo decomposes the writing process in its subtasks and provides specific instruction and tools for the completion of each activity. Furthermore, two evaluation studies on the effects of the writing environment are summarized. The results show that working with escribo is superior to a situation without CBS. Implications of these results will be discussed with regard to the benefits and restrictions of fostering expert writing activities through computer-based scaffolding. Chapter 3- I describe nine popular readability formulae. These are designed to evaluate a piece of English text in terms of the age or grade level of school students at which it should be readable. By example and argument I conclude that these formulae are of only limited use: perhaps as a cheap and easy method for evaluating school textbooks and library holdings. The family of cloze tests is designed to evaluate grammar, vocabulary and reading comprehension by making use of communication theory and the redundancy principle. The most popular are the classical cloze procedure and the C-test. Both are reasonably reliable, but the former is arguably the more valid. Both have been used in many countries and many languages as part of the testing of scholastic ability in the candidates‘ native languages or in second languages, though using trained assessors remains the yardstick. The Coh-Metrix project examines the coherence of text according to 60 categories, but is still in the course of development and seems not to be flawless. Lexical analysis is a computer-intensive tool for evaluating the active vocabulary used in producing a piece of text. It provides an objective measure of the progress of students who are learning English, especially as a second language. It has also been used to evaluate the quality of English teachers and teaching. But though I am only an outsider looking in, I am forced to conclude that the only truly valid method for evaluating language skills is by trained human assessors. Chapter 4- This paper proposes a model for teaching writing strategies, tools and techniques within a new aim pursuit. The new objective is the simultaneous development of cognitive and sociocultural processes of written communication for the citizens of the 21st Century. This didactic model is justified by the exigencies of multicultural and technological societies. In order to enter the labour world, to have access to knowledge, information and social relation structures, current societies request two basic competences to their citizens: a) use and command of IT technologies andevelopment of both competences.verbal languageThiNganHang.comin a multilingual and multimodal fashion is beThat is why the didactic model offers strategies with thed b) communication in different languagesing given priority in the. Written aim of developing: 1) multimodal writing cognitive processes and operations, using the computer; 2) writing sociocultural processes using different languages, that is to say, in a multilingual way. To achieve simultaneously the already mentioned aims, the tools and techniques of the didactic model have to be creative. However, these aims, tools and techniques are based on the Metasociocognitive Model which explains written communication as the integration of cognitive and sociocultural processes. The Writing Metasociocultural Model is interactive focused on research and theoretical reflection about writing. It has been functioning since the 70´s. ThiNganHang.com
Trang 10
Preface ix Also, the Creative, Shared Technological Model (CCT-Model) of Writing-Teaching, is based on the results of an ethnographic research project, concretely, a case study. In this project, writing-teaching is deeply studied applying the content analysis method and validation processes such as triangulation, saturation and crystallization. The new contribution covered in this project is the global approach offered of every possible variable interacting with the writer in a multicultural classroom. The conclusions of the case study allow to design strategies, tools and techniques to enhance the development of all writing processes, from a practical teaching point of view. Finally, sociocultural justification and theoretical research based documentation of the Writing-Teaching Model, support a future multimethod research, which is currently in process. This research project aims to the validation of a Writing-Teaching program (based on the already mentioned models), in multicultural samples of subjects, with control and experimental groups. The objectives of this project are, on the one hand, calculation of the effectiveness of the program and, on the other hand, analysing thoroughly the teaching process when applying writing tools. Chapter 5- This chapter reviews several recent studies of the relationships between rubric-referenced self-assessment and the quality of elementary and middle school students‘ writing and self-efficacy for writing. The self-assessment process employed in each study emphasized the articulation of criteria and a carefully scaffolded process of review by students, followed by revision. Taken together, the studies show that rubric-referenced self- assessment is associated with more effective writing, as evidenced by higher total scores for essays written by students in the treatment condition, as well as higher scores for each of the criteria on the scoring rubric. The reviewed research also reveals an association between the treatment and the self-efficacy of girls for writing. The chapter includes a review of relevant literature, a detailed description of the process of self-assessment, a report on the studies, and a discussion of the implications for teaching and research. Chapter 6- Some of the difficulties busy clinicians face are time constraints and limitations on creativity. It is difficult to have a strong clinical focus and yet find the time and energy to devote toward scholarly productivity. Often, there seems to be insufficient time to ―put pen to paper.‖ When time permits, creativity is often lacking because of fatigue or concerns about other issues. As the day-to-day responsibilities take their toll, it can be difficult to express the scholarly interest that serves as the foundation for an academic career. An interesting project or study can become lost in the shuffle of accomplishing more mundane tasks. scholarly value. Input from surgeons at various levels of accomplishments and at wideranging stations in their careers makes this of value to a broad audience. Our focus is onThis manuscript serves as a template to guide busy clinicians in writing papers ofThiNganHang.com young academicians without notable experience in writing scholarly papers. In the pages that follow we elaborate on the writing of the essential elements of a peer-reviewed manuscript. Chapter 7- A writing assignment, which develops the skills required of a published author, is hereby described. It has been developed for undergraduate chemistry students with limited research and writing experience. This assignment is part of a writing intensive program developed at Simon Fraser University (SFU), where writing is used as an educational tool. As part of this assignment every student is required to submit a Chemical Laboratory Information Profile (CLIP) on one of the chemicals used or produced in a second year chemistry laboratory course. These profiles are used to introduce students to the riggers of publications, the requirements of efficient exchange of ideas and how to research the ThiNganHang.com
Trang 11
x Nathan L. Mertens hazards related to the chemicals used in the undergraduate laboratory setting. The CLIPs are later used by the students in the laboratory. Chapter 8- The rules which epitomise good writing may on occasions be broken, deliberately and with good purpose. This can well occur when students or staff set out to engage effectively, and through reflective writing, with their personal and professional development in mind. The rationale for this unusual decision to engage in what is frankly disorderly writing is set out briefly. Its characteristics are summarised, in implicit contrast with more conventional styles of writing. Brief mention is made of claims for the effectiveness of this style when used for developmental purposes; and reference is made to the publications of some of those who have endorsed this approach. Chapter 9- Since the seminal theoretical models of writing (such as Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1987; or Hayes & Flower, 1980) there has been considerable progress as regards the understanding of the cognitive processes and personal variables involved in writing (Alamargot & Chanquoy, 2001; MacArthur, Graham, & Fitzgerald, 2006). The majority of these models recognize writing as a complex and demanding task which involves a large set of higher and lower order cognitive processes, which must be activated and coordinated recursively throughout the entire writing process. This complexity explains that achieving proficiency in writing requires the deployment of a great load of writer‘s cognitive resources to cope with managing and monitoring the writing environment, the constraints imposed by the writing topic and task, and the processes and variables involved in composing a text (Graham and Harris, 2000; Kellogg, 1987a; Ransdell and Levy, 1996; Zimmerman and Risemberg, 1997). In fact, coordinating these processes in such a way that yields a text which fulfills the requirements of the writing task requires high levels of self-regulation. Since the greater importance afforded to the self-regulatory processes in writing, in this chapter, firstly, we analyze the specific role of self-regulation in the more recent theoretical models of writing and in the instructional field of writing composition. In the second part of the chapter, we summarize in part our previous intervention study (see García & Fidalgo, 2006), developed with 5th and 6th grade Spanish primary students with Learning Disabilities. The study presents the effectivenes of a self-regulation strategy intervention program based on the Social Cognitive Model of Sequential Skills Acquisition to improve LD student‘s writing competence, analyzing changes in writing product and process through on-line measures. Finally, proposals for future researches and implications for educative practice are suggested. Chapter 10- Writing is a complex and cognitively demanding activity. It cannot be performed as a sequence of discrete steps; it requires the simultaneous combination of severalstrategies and the application of various mental resources. Writing is, therefore, both arecursive and a dynamic process. To be successful, writers need an understanding of theThiNganHang.com components of a quality text as well as knowledge of writing strategies that can be used to shape and organize the writing process. In particular, writing competence requires appropriate and self-regulated knowledge of strategies for planning what to write, and then revising what has been written. In this chapter, we first present a review of the recent research on the planning and revision processes in writing in order to show the importance that these have in the development of writing competence. Then, we describe the existing research, evaluating strategy-focused intervention studies, to provide an overview of the nature of the interventions programs and an indication of which have been most successful. In the second part of the chapter, we describe and summarize findings from our own studies (Torrance, ThiNganHang.com
Trang 12
Preface xi Fidalgo, & García, 2007; and Fidalgo, Torrance, & García, 2008). These studies move beyond existing research by (a) evaluating the effectiveness of this kind of intervention programs for developing self-regulations strategies in writing with normally achieving writers without learning disabilities, b) exploring the effects of strategy focused instruction on students‘ writing processes as well as on their written products and (b) demonstrating the long-term effects of this kind of intervention. In a final section, we discuss the practical implications of this body of research (both ours and others) and make suggestions for how lessons learned from this research might be applied in the classroom. ThiNganHang.com ThiNganHang.com
Trang 14
In: Writing: Processes, Tools and Techniques ISBN: 978-1-61668-916-2 Editor: Nathan L. Mertens, pp. 1-18 © 2010 Nova Science Publishers, Inc. Chapter 1 METHODS, TECHNIQUES,AND TOOLS FOR THE ON-LINE STUDY OF THE WRITING PROCESS Thierry Olive1* Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique & Université de Poitiers, France ABSTRACT In the field of writing studies, the shift between the product-oriented approach to the process-oriented one has resulted not only in conceptual changes in the theories of writing, but also in development of methods and techniques that have enabled us to study the writing process. These real-time or on-line methods track the writing processes while they are operating in order to describe their time course and their functional characteristics. Generally, these methods focus on three features of writing: writing fluency through the analyses of pauses and execution periods, functional characteristics of the writing processes with thinking-aloud techniques, and their demands on working memory with dual-task designs. The most common tools used for that purpose are computers with digitizing tablets and keystroke recording programs. Moreover, recently, a new perspective has been opened by the analysis of the writer‘s eye movement coupled to the analysis of the on-going text. Some scarce research has also attempted to investigate writing with brain imagery techniques. All these methods are shedding lighton the cognitive operations necessary to compose a text. Consequently, the aim of thischapter is to provide readers with an overview of these methods and tools in order tofigure out how to conceptualize and design new experiments. In parallel, through theThiNganHang.com presentation of these methods and of the tools that are required to implement them, this chapter also delineates the issues that are currently addressed in research on writing. * Corresponding author: Thierry Olive, Centre de Recherches sur la Cognition et l‘Apprentissage, 99 avenue du recteur Pineau, F-86000 Poitiers, FRANCE. E-mail : thierry.olive@univ-poitiers.fr. ThiNganHang.com
Trang 15
2 Thierry Olive 1. INTRODUCTION Composing a text engages several major cognitive components that intervene at different levels of representation. At a semantic level, a component, called planning, allows writers to retrieve ideas they want to include in their text from their long-term memory. With that component, writers can also organize these ideas into a textual plan that fits the rhetorical goals of the writing situation. A second component, the translator or formulator, intervenes at a linguistic level of representation to transform the pre-verbal message constructed by planning into written language. For that purpose, the syntactic framework of sentences is first constructed and words are then retrieved from the mental lexicon along with their morphological properties and orthographical form. A third component, which operates at a motor level, is used by writers to transcribe the verbal message in a written form (typing or handwriting). One specific feature of writing is permanency of the written trace, which permits writers to come back to their text and to try to improve it if needed. For that purpose, writers engage a fourth cognitive component that monitors quality and adequacy of their text. With these monitoring processes they can read their on-going text, diagnose problems they have detected, and edit them if it is necessary. In that case, according to the nature of the problem (e.g., conceptual, linguistic or related to handwriting) they call back the planning, translating or execution components. Obviously, such monitoring can also occur mentally, namely before the prepared message is written down, for instance at the exit of the planning and translating components. One goal of on-line studies of writing is thus to track when and how these processes are implemented by writers, but also how they are affected by factors related to the writing situation or by cognitive characteristics of the writers. One factor that severely affects how writing processes are implemented is working memory. Writing is indeed one of the most effortful activities that humans can implement (Kellogg, 1994, Piolat, Olive & Kellogg, 2005). Since working memory is the cognitive structure in charge of managing cognitive resources and of supervising implementation and coordination of the cognitive processes (e.g., Baddeley, 2000; Cowan, 2005), writing research has focused on the role of working memory in writing (Berninger & Swanson, 1994; Kellogg, 1996; McCutchen, 1996, 2000; Olive, 2004, in press). When managing the flow of written production, writers indeed have to stay within the limited capacity of working memory. For this, they resort to mechanisms that minimize the amount of resources required by writing. A well-known mechanism that reduces the amount of resources devoted to a particular process is automatisation. With practice, operations frequently implemented require fewer resourcesand become automatized. Moreover, they can be coordinated in parallel with other processes.Strategic activation of the cognitive processes is also important (Brown & Carr, 1989). WhenThiNganHang.com the resources necessary to accomplish a task exceed the amount of resources available, the individual is faced with two options. First, it can accommodate this extra cost and start all processes necessary to accomplish the task. However, this type of operation is risky because it usually leads to low performance (Fayol, 1999). For example, in the case of writing, texts can be syntactically or semantically less rich, and the writing process may be longer. Second, the individual can switch from a parallel to a sequential activation of the processes to decrease the general processing demands of the activity. In writing, it is often hypothesized that the use of such strategies is a sign of skilled writing. In that perspective a second goal of on-line studies of writing is to describe and assess the processing demands of the writing processes. ThiNganHang.com
Trang 16
Methods, Techniques, and Tools for the On-line Study of the Writing… 3 In sum, to better understand the dynamic of the writing process, on-line methods aim at describing the operations carried out by the writing processes by assessing their functional characteristics (processing time, processing demands, mode of coordination). Of course, other types of methods are used in research on writing. For example, with off-line methods, researchers can analyze the written products and the textual operations to infer the underlying writing processes. By contrast, on-line methods track the time course of the writing processes at the time they are conducted. They include the analysis of writing fluency (the study of pauses and of execution periods), the dual-task paradigm, the method of verbal protocols, the analysis of writers‘ eyes movement, and more recently functional brain imagery. 2. PAUSES AND EXECUTION PERIODS IN WRITING 2.1. Theoretical and Methodological Basis At a behavioral level, text composition can be characterized by two activities: pausing and executing the text (handwriting or typing). Writers spend roughly half of the composition time pausing or, conversely, handwriting (Alamargot, Dansac, Chesnet & Fayol, 2007; Alves, Castro, Sousa & Strömqvist, 2007; Strömqvist & Ahlsén, 1999). Investigating the temporal dynamic of writing thus requires studying pauses, but also execution periods. Pauses — Pauses are interruptions of handwriting. However, among all the pauses that can be detected during a writing process, not all pauses are of interest for research on the cognitive processes underlying writing. Indeed, some pauses are only due to mechanical demands of handwriting or of typing. For example, a writer tracing an ‗i‘ or a ‗t‘ needs to interrupt handwriting for tracing the dot on the ‗i‘ or the bar of the ‗t‘. Similarly, when typing, moving the fingers between keys create pauses that merely result from key position rather than from occurrence of high-level writing processes. Accordingly, two kinds of pauses have to be distinguished: pauses during which writing processes can occur, and pauses resulting from handwriting or typing mechanical demands. The latter pauses are considered too short to involve high-level writing processes, and so functionally they do not differ from handwriting. Methodologically, it is thus indispensable to distinguish between pauses during which handwriting has stopped long enough so that highThiNganHang.com-level writing processes do occur, from mechanical pauses. For that purpose, defining a threshold affording such a distinction is necessary. Very different thresholds varying between 130 ms and more than 5 seconds have been used (in handwriting: 130 ms by Alamargot, Dansac, Chesnet, & Fayol, 2007; 200 ms by Passerault, 1991; 250 ms by Olive & Kellogg, 2002; Olive, Alves & Castro, 2009; in typing: 1 second by Alves, Castro & Olive, 2008; 2 seconds by Alves, Castro, Sousa & Strömqvist, 2007; Levy & Ransdell, 1995; Schilperoord, 2002; Wengelin, 2007; 5 seconds by Jansen, van Waes, & van den Berg, 1996). A recent finding suggests that the high-level writing processes can occur during pauses shorter than a quarter of a second (Alamargot, Dansac, Chesnet, & Fayol, 2007). To sum up, pauses that are of interest for the researcher on text production are only those whose length is sufficient to allow the writing processes to occur. ThiNganHang.com
Trang 17
4 Thierry Olive Pauses can occur when writers no longer have information to continue their text, or because of competition between writing processes for limited capacity. Accordingly, pauses would allow preparing the next segment of text. Pauses would also allow examining the text already written to review it. This suggests that planning, translating and revision can all be implemented during pauses (for confirmation, see Alves, Castro & Olive, 2008; Olive, Alves & Castro, 2009). Actually, two features of pauses are studied: pause duration and pause location. Pause duration is supposed to reflect length of the underlying process(es). Here, researchers are confronted with difficulty to assess whether several processes can be activated during one single pause. Pause duration is also supposed to be a function of complexity of the processes engaged in, and it is thus assumed to reflect processing load of the on-going processes (Foulin, 1995; Schilperoord, 2002): longer pauses reflect cognitive processes that are more effortful compared to load of processes reflected by shorter pauses. It is nevertheless difficult to assume that a 20-second pause reflect a processing load ten times higher than a 2-second pause. Moreover, this raises the question of independence between processing time and processing load. Pause location is also of great interest as pause duration systematically varies according to structural characteristics of texts (e.g., words, phrases, sentences, paragraphs). For instance, pauses are more frequent or longer at the border of large syntactic or textual unit (sentence, paragraph) compared to low-level units. However, the covariation between pause duration and syntactic location is not systematic. For example, Foulin (1998) attempted to explain length of pauses according to their syntactic location by conducting various regression analyses. He showed, first, that temporal organization of production is only partly predicted by the text‘s syntactic structure. Secondly, he showed that if clauses can be considered as the planning unit in speech production, in writing, the sentence could be a conceptual and linguistic planning unit. It is also assumed that pause reflects the macro-and micro-structural planning of text. Pauses between paragraphs and between sentences would mainly result from knowledge management, so to conceptual planning (however, in the beginning of sentences, syntactic and lexical processes might intervene jointly with conceptual planning); inter- propositional pauses would indicate mainly formulating processes; breaks intra-propositional pauses would be affected by predictability of lexical items. The functions of pauses are actually poorly specified in writing research (see Torrance & Galbraith, 2006), and because during pauses all working memory capacity is freed from handwriting demands, pauses have generally been linked with the more effortful processes,namely planning and revising (Foulin, 1995; Schilperoord, 2002). Pauses interpretationremains however difficult given that many factors can affect pause durations and frequencies.ThiNganHang.com The coexistence of physiological factors, cognitive and social factors are all potential determinants of the number, duration and location of pauses. Finally, it must be underlined that pauses can also happen for reasons unrelated to the writing processes. For example, writers can suspend writing because their mobile phone rung. Obviously, such pauses have to be excluded of the analyses, but the difficulty is in identifying them. Execution periods — Although writing research has traditionally focused on the studies of pauses, in the preceding years research has turn attention to execution periods (or language bursts according to Chenoweth & Hayes, 2001). Execution periods can be defined as the time elapsed between two consecutive pauses during which a writing processes can occur. ThiNganHang.com
Hiển thị 17 trang đầu. Tải tài liệu để xem đầy đủ.
Bình luận (0)
Chưa có bình luận nào. Hãy là người đầu tiên!