Does the Simple View of Writing Explain L2 Writing Development?: A Meta-Analysis
This meta-analysis examines how components of the Simple View of Writing contribute to writing development for English second-language (L2) learners. Previous studies examining first-language learners suggest that transcription and ideation may predict writing achievement. In order to investigate wh...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Reading psychology 2020-07, Vol.41 (5), p.485-511 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 511 |
---|---|
container_issue | 5 |
container_start_page | 485 |
container_title | Reading psychology |
container_volume | 41 |
creator | Graham, Keith M. Eslami, Zohreh R. |
description | This meta-analysis examines how components of the Simple View of Writing contribute to writing development for English second-language (L2) learners. Previous studies examining first-language learners suggest that transcription and ideation may predict writing achievement. In order to investigate whether these components similarly contribute to L2 writing, this study examined effect sizes (correlations) reported in previous literature on the relationship between components of transcription and ideation to writing. After a systematic search and screening, 30 studies with 97 reported effect sizes were included in this study. Three separate meta-analyses were run for transcription (spelling/handwriting), oral language, and vocabulary. Results suggest that, independently, transcription accounted for 31.22%, vocabulary 24.83%, and oral language 15.76% of variation in writing. Further moderator analyses were run to better understand factors contributing to variation between studies. These results suggest that the components of the Simple View of Writing may explain writing variation in L2 writing. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1080/02702711.2020.1768989 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_infor</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_3076925897</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1261806</ericid><sourcerecordid>3076925897</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-6f24c6b7b8fdb858fc66636f1c8014b798f276c36a6714251443bef0e60b9a003</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kF1LwzAUhoMoOKc_YRDwunqStknqjY5tfjFR8OsypF2iGV1Tk865f2_L5i6FAwfO-7znHF6EBgTOCAg4B8rbIuSMAm1HnIlMZHuoR1JKImAi3Ue9jok66BAdhTAHIKlgvIeexk4H3Hxq_GwXdanxm9Ur7Ax-97ax1Qee_NSlshWe0t1orL916eqFrprLCzzED7pR0bBS5TrYcIwOjCqDPtn2Pnq9nryMbqPp483daDiNiphBEzFDk4LlPBdmlotUmIIxFjNDCgEkyXkmDOWsZRXjJKEpSZI41wY0gzxTAHEfnW721t59LXVo5NwtfftEkDFwltFUZLyl0g1VeBeC10bW3i6UX0sCsgtP_oUnu_DkNrzWN9j4tLfFzjO5J5QRAazVrza6rYzzC7VyvpzJRq1L541XVWHbN_4_8QuQn3zx</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3076925897</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Does the Simple View of Writing Explain L2 Writing Development?: A Meta-Analysis</title><source>EBSCOhost Education Source</source><creator>Graham, Keith M. ; Eslami, Zohreh R.</creator><creatorcontrib>Graham, Keith M. ; Eslami, Zohreh R.</creatorcontrib><description>This meta-analysis examines how components of the Simple View of Writing contribute to writing development for English second-language (L2) learners. Previous studies examining first-language learners suggest that transcription and ideation may predict writing achievement. In order to investigate whether these components similarly contribute to L2 writing, this study examined effect sizes (correlations) reported in previous literature on the relationship between components of transcription and ideation to writing. After a systematic search and screening, 30 studies with 97 reported effect sizes were included in this study. Three separate meta-analyses were run for transcription (spelling/handwriting), oral language, and vocabulary. Results suggest that, independently, transcription accounted for 31.22%, vocabulary 24.83%, and oral language 15.76% of variation in writing. Further moderator analyses were run to better understand factors contributing to variation between studies. These results suggest that the components of the Simple View of Writing may explain writing variation in L2 writing.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0270-2711</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1521-0685</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/02702711.2020.1768989</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Philadelphia: Routledge</publisher><subject>Correlation ; English (Second Language) ; English as a second language ; English as a second language learning ; Handwriting ; Meta Analysis ; Native Language ; Oral Language ; Research Reports ; Second Language Instruction ; Second Language Learning ; Second language writing ; Spelling ; Spoken language ; Teaching Methods ; Transcription ; vocabulary ; Vocabulary Skills ; Writing ; Writing Achievement ; Writing acquisition ; Writing Attitudes ; Writing Instruction</subject><ispartof>Reading psychology, 2020-07, Vol.41 (5), p.485-511</ispartof><rights>2020 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC 2020</rights><rights>2020 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-6f24c6b7b8fdb858fc66636f1c8014b798f276c36a6714251443bef0e60b9a003</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-6f24c6b7b8fdb858fc66636f1c8014b798f276c36a6714251443bef0e60b9a003</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-9277-8589 ; 0000-0003-2969-5056</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1261806$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Graham, Keith M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eslami, Zohreh R.</creatorcontrib><title>Does the Simple View of Writing Explain L2 Writing Development?: A Meta-Analysis</title><title>Reading psychology</title><description>This meta-analysis examines how components of the Simple View of Writing contribute to writing development for English second-language (L2) learners. Previous studies examining first-language learners suggest that transcription and ideation may predict writing achievement. In order to investigate whether these components similarly contribute to L2 writing, this study examined effect sizes (correlations) reported in previous literature on the relationship between components of transcription and ideation to writing. After a systematic search and screening, 30 studies with 97 reported effect sizes were included in this study. Three separate meta-analyses were run for transcription (spelling/handwriting), oral language, and vocabulary. Results suggest that, independently, transcription accounted for 31.22%, vocabulary 24.83%, and oral language 15.76% of variation in writing. Further moderator analyses were run to better understand factors contributing to variation between studies. These results suggest that the components of the Simple View of Writing may explain writing variation in L2 writing.</description><subject>Correlation</subject><subject>English (Second Language)</subject><subject>English as a second language</subject><subject>English as a second language learning</subject><subject>Handwriting</subject><subject>Meta Analysis</subject><subject>Native Language</subject><subject>Oral Language</subject><subject>Research Reports</subject><subject>Second Language Instruction</subject><subject>Second Language Learning</subject><subject>Second language writing</subject><subject>Spelling</subject><subject>Spoken language</subject><subject>Teaching Methods</subject><subject>Transcription</subject><subject>vocabulary</subject><subject>Vocabulary Skills</subject><subject>Writing</subject><subject>Writing Achievement</subject><subject>Writing acquisition</subject><subject>Writing Attitudes</subject><subject>Writing Instruction</subject><issn>0270-2711</issn><issn>1521-0685</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kF1LwzAUhoMoOKc_YRDwunqStknqjY5tfjFR8OsypF2iGV1Tk865f2_L5i6FAwfO-7znHF6EBgTOCAg4B8rbIuSMAm1HnIlMZHuoR1JKImAi3Ue9jok66BAdhTAHIKlgvIeexk4H3Hxq_GwXdanxm9Ur7Ax-97ax1Qee_NSlshWe0t1orL916eqFrprLCzzED7pR0bBS5TrYcIwOjCqDPtn2Pnq9nryMbqPp483daDiNiphBEzFDk4LlPBdmlotUmIIxFjNDCgEkyXkmDOWsZRXjJKEpSZI41wY0gzxTAHEfnW721t59LXVo5NwtfftEkDFwltFUZLyl0g1VeBeC10bW3i6UX0sCsgtP_oUnu_DkNrzWN9j4tLfFzjO5J5QRAazVrza6rYzzC7VyvpzJRq1L541XVWHbN_4_8QuQn3zx</recordid><startdate>20200703</startdate><enddate>20200703</enddate><creator>Graham, Keith M.</creator><creator>Eslami, Zohreh R.</creator><general>Routledge</general><general>Taylor & Francis Ltd</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7T9</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9277-8589</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2969-5056</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20200703</creationdate><title>Does the Simple View of Writing Explain L2 Writing Development?: A Meta-Analysis</title><author>Graham, Keith M. ; Eslami, Zohreh R.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-6f24c6b7b8fdb858fc66636f1c8014b798f276c36a6714251443bef0e60b9a003</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Correlation</topic><topic>English (Second Language)</topic><topic>English as a second language</topic><topic>English as a second language learning</topic><topic>Handwriting</topic><topic>Meta Analysis</topic><topic>Native Language</topic><topic>Oral Language</topic><topic>Research Reports</topic><topic>Second Language Instruction</topic><topic>Second Language Learning</topic><topic>Second language writing</topic><topic>Spelling</topic><topic>Spoken language</topic><topic>Teaching Methods</topic><topic>Transcription</topic><topic>vocabulary</topic><topic>Vocabulary Skills</topic><topic>Writing</topic><topic>Writing Achievement</topic><topic>Writing acquisition</topic><topic>Writing Attitudes</topic><topic>Writing Instruction</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Graham, Keith M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eslami, Zohreh R.</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</collection><jtitle>Reading psychology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Graham, Keith M.</au><au>Eslami, Zohreh R.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1261806</ericid><atitle>Does the Simple View of Writing Explain L2 Writing Development?: A Meta-Analysis</atitle><jtitle>Reading psychology</jtitle><date>2020-07-03</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>41</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>485</spage><epage>511</epage><pages>485-511</pages><issn>0270-2711</issn><eissn>1521-0685</eissn><abstract>This meta-analysis examines how components of the Simple View of Writing contribute to writing development for English second-language (L2) learners. Previous studies examining first-language learners suggest that transcription and ideation may predict writing achievement. In order to investigate whether these components similarly contribute to L2 writing, this study examined effect sizes (correlations) reported in previous literature on the relationship between components of transcription and ideation to writing. After a systematic search and screening, 30 studies with 97 reported effect sizes were included in this study. Three separate meta-analyses were run for transcription (spelling/handwriting), oral language, and vocabulary. Results suggest that, independently, transcription accounted for 31.22%, vocabulary 24.83%, and oral language 15.76% of variation in writing. Further moderator analyses were run to better understand factors contributing to variation between studies. These results suggest that the components of the Simple View of Writing may explain writing variation in L2 writing.</abstract><cop>Philadelphia</cop><pub>Routledge</pub><doi>10.1080/02702711.2020.1768989</doi><tpages>27</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9277-8589</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2969-5056</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0270-2711 |
ispartof | Reading psychology, 2020-07, Vol.41 (5), p.485-511 |
issn | 0270-2711 1521-0685 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_3076925897 |
source | EBSCOhost Education Source |
subjects | Correlation English (Second Language) English as a second language English as a second language learning Handwriting Meta Analysis Native Language Oral Language Research Reports Second Language Instruction Second Language Learning Second language writing Spelling Spoken language Teaching Methods Transcription vocabulary Vocabulary Skills Writing Writing Achievement Writing acquisition Writing Attitudes Writing Instruction |
title | Does the Simple View of Writing Explain L2 Writing Development?: A Meta-Analysis |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-04T14%3A44%3A40IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_infor&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Does%20the%20Simple%20View%20of%20Writing%20Explain%20L2%20Writing%20Development?:%20A%20Meta-Analysis&rft.jtitle=Reading%20psychology&rft.au=Graham,%20Keith%20M.&rft.date=2020-07-03&rft.volume=41&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=485&rft.epage=511&rft.pages=485-511&rft.issn=0270-2711&rft.eissn=1521-0685&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/02702711.2020.1768989&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_infor%3E3076925897%3C/proquest_infor%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3076925897&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ1261806&rfr_iscdi=true |