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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Reading psychology 2020-07, Vol.41 (5), p.485-511
Hauptverfasser: Graham, Keith M., Eslami, Zohreh R.
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 &amp; Francis Group, LLC 2020</rights><rights>2020 Taylor &amp; 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 &amp; 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