Modelling the Development of Written...

Modelling the Developmentof Written Composition

WRITING DEVELOPMENT: MULTIPLE PERSPECTIVES

Thursday 2nd – Friday 3rd July 2009Jeffery Hall, Institute of Education, 20 Bedford Way, London WC1H OAL

Denis Alamargot* & Michel Fayol**

*Laboratory CeRCA-CNRS - University of Poitiers - France**Laboratory LAPSCO-CNRS - University Blaise Pascal - Clermont-Ferrand - France

1

Alamargot, D. & Fayol, M. (2009). Modelling the development of written composition. In R. Beard, D. Myhill, M.Nystrand & J. Riley (Eds). Handbook of Writing Development (pp. 23-47). Sage. United Kingdom.

vendredi 21 août 2009

Introduction

2


1 Introduction

• « A developmental model of written production should predict both the course of the writing processes (ie the processing strategies) and the characteristics of the end product (ie the textual quality and quantity), in the light of the writer’s general development, his/her specific writing expertise and the learning context.»

• Such a model does not yet exist...• Nevertheless major advances :

- in experimental studies (Berninger et al., 2002; Bourdin and Fayol, 1994; Chanquoy, Foulin and Fayol, 1990; Graham, 2006; Swanson and Berninger, 1996);

- in theoretical models (Bereiter and Scardamalia, 1987; Berninger and Swanson, 1994; De La Paz and Graham, 2002; Graham, Harris and Mason, 2005; McCutchen, 1996; McCutchen, 2000; Scardamalia and Bereiter, 1991)

3


1 Introduction

• Models are not detailed: conceptions of writing research have been based on two different and, until now, relatively independent approaches to verbal production (Fayol, 2002).

‣ The first one:- research of a largely fundamental nature,- inspired mainly by generativist-type linguistic models,- establishing an integrative psycholinguistic theory of verbal production,- focus almost exclusively on the production of words and sentences, the basic units of formal linguistics.

‣ The second one:- initially more reliant on social demand,- several production models in order to improve the way in which - utterances or texts are organized, - they are processed by those who are called upon to perceive and understand them.

• Opposition between the two categories of units: sentence / discourse

4


1 Introduction

• The first approach - Sentence - Psycholinguistic approach‣ Lexical and syntactic processing has therefore been studied from a

psycholinguistic perspective that is strongly inspired by models of oral verbal production.

‣ Initially based mainly on Levelt’s model (Levelt, 1989, 1999; Levelt, Roelofs and Meyer, 1999), derived from the research carried out by Garrett (1980) and closely associated with the analysis of production errors.

‣ Subsequently, systematic use has been made of the classic paradigms of experimental psychology reaction time measures, often associated with a priming task.

‣ These studies have paid very little attention to the question of development, even though Levelt (1998) himself points out that this was a central issue for early psycholinguistics research.

5


1 Introduction

• The second approach - Text composition - Cognitive approach‣ Involves processes that go beyond isolated words and sentences,

‣ Cognitive perspective:- information processing, rhetoric and communication,- problem-solving activity, where a communicative goal has to be reached by managing a set of varied constraints, including the characteristics of the recipient, the type of text and the availability of domain knowledge and linguistic knowledge.

‣ Hayes and Flower’s initial model (1980) is a perfect illustration:- emphasis on the planning, formulation and revision components,- as well as on the management of constraints in the course of the activity and the dynamics of the resulting processes (Flower and Hayes, 1980).

‣ The methods, think-aloud protocols (Hayes and Flower, 1983) and double and triple tasks – (Kellogg, 1987, 1988; Levy and Ransdell, 1996a), are therefore intended to define the time course of processes and/or attentional demands.

6


1 Introduction

• The first approach - Sentence - Psycholinguistic approach‣ the aim is to identify the units involved in writing (semantic,

orthographic , phonological and graphemic units, motor programmes),

‣ together with the various processes and their time course in a system of modular processing, organized according to a precise architecture.

‣ Researchers have to reduce the field of possibilities and generally focus on the production of isolated units (word, letter and sentence production), sacrificing the ecological validity of the tasks they administer and the role of superordinate dimensions.

7


1 Introduction

• The second approach - Text composition - Cognitive approach‣ identifying

- the larger processing components (planning, formulation, revision, execution),- the strategies for their implementation,- the effect of their use on the resulting text quantity and quality.

‣ Researchers regard the activity as a single, complex whole, and this sometimes leads them to adopt a global viewpoint, thus neglecting the more fine-grained analysis of individual processes.

• Models remain relatively imprecise insofar as the nature of the linguistic and orthographic processes involved in formulation are concerned. This is all the more paradoxical given that these processes lie at the heart of the writing development and impose certain constraints (Fayol, 1999)

8


1 Introduction

• Formulation...‣ Neglected by writing models in particular and by the cognitive

approach to writing in general - Adult-Expert centered...

‣ Experts are supposed to:- have acquired their language’s orthographic rules and proceduralized the motor programmes ;- transcribe and execute a message without incurring any of the costs associated with these processes.

‣ Formulation processes are generally regarded as relatively accessible and free of constraints for expert writers- even in adults, the written modality has a higher implementation cost that the oral one (Bourdin and Fayol, 2002).

• For beginning writers, for whom graphomotor skills and spelling are still in the process of being acquired and structured, formulation represents the bulk of the processes, constraints and difficulties.

9


1 Introduction

• In our opinion no developmental approach to written composition can be complete without analyzing:

‣ the acquisition (construction of processes and representations) of the formulation component in all its dimensions, including spelling which, up to now, has mainly been tackled within the framework of classic psycholinguistics,

‣ the functional development of this component, in terms of learning, the automation of certain processes and strategic control,

‣ the realtime management of the implementation of the different components, whose interactiveness depends on their respective efficiency at a given level of expertise.

10


From a general toa developmental modelof written production

11


From a general to a developmental model of written production

• Several publications have described and discussed existing models of written production and their successive updates (for summaries, see Alamargot and Chanquoy, 2001; Butterfield, 1994; Fayol, 1997a, 2002; Levy and Ransdell, 1996b; MacArthur, Graham and Fitzgerald, 2006; Scardamalia and Bereiter, 1991; Zesiger, 1995).

• All these authors agree that the activity of written composition draws on:- two types of knowledge: content being evoked (theme of the text) and linguistic knowledge (lexical, syntactic and rhetorical features),- temporary memory (generally referred to as working memory) to maintain and handle information,- a dynamic situation, where the text being produced depends on the goals that have been set, the recipient, the production conditions and the text produced so far,- the existence of three components – planning, formulation and revision,- they must also be coordinated and managed in order to ensure their seamless implementation and the fluency of the production.

12



• Four critics to the general framework of text composition1. Based on data yielded by studies of adults. It cannot, therefore, be

immediately transposed to children, nor is it necessarily adapted to learning issues.

2. The formulation component and its constituent processes have never been properly defined and subjected to detailed investigation.

3. Varying degrees of importance given to the different components during realtime production. Despite the data reported by Kellogg (1987, 1988), we only have very general information about the dynamics of composition, which encompasses all the dimensions involved, from planning to graphic execution.

4. The precise effects of processing overload on the various components that have been implemented (e.g. do orthographic difficulties have an impact in real time on the planning of ideas?).

13



• Despite these limitations, this framework has nonetheless been the driving force behind numerous studies of the evolution of performances over the 6- to 20-year age range and on the factors thought to influence this evolution.

• It has also led to the construction of two developmental models:

• Bereiter and Scardamalia’s (1987) model,

• Berninger and Swanson’s (1994) model.

14



• Bereiter and Scardamalia’s (1987) model:

• Two categories of strategies: the knowledge-telling strategy and the knowledge-transforming strategy.

• Written composition initially takes the form of the straightforward transcription of knowledge (knowledge-telling strategy). The text is composed by formulating ideas as and when they are retrieved from long-term memory, without any reorganization of the text’s conceptual content or linguistic form. - This composition mode, which is exclusive to beginning writers, may result in a good-quality production, as in the case of narratives, for example.

• Knowledge-transforming strategy is more elaborate, more frequently observed in adolescents (from the age of 14 years onwards) and adults. Reorganizing domain knowledge in line with rhetorical and linguistic constraints (and vice-versa), and the state of the text produced so far (Scardamalia and Bereiter, 1991).- This problem requires the writer to constantly monitor the gap between production (the text underway) and intention, and to reduce this gap by creating new contents (under the influence of pragmatic/rhetorical constraints) or new rhetorical/pragmatic goals (under the influence of domain constraints).

15



• Berninger and Swanson’s (1994) model.

• A developmental version of Hayes and Flower’s model (1980) and a more in-depth definition of formulation:- text generation: involves the transformation of ideas into linguistic representations - processing of words, sentences, paragraphs and texts);- transcription: translation of representations into written symbols. This allows phonological and orthographic coding (spelling and grammar), text segmentation (punctuation, cohesion) and fine motor skill (graphomotor execution) operations to take place.

• One of the characteristics of this model is that it sets a specific timetable for :- the emergence and complexification of the three components : Formulation, Revision and Planning,- their progressive interaction in WM.

16



• Two key points arise:

• the problems raised by formulation have been neglected.This component, which is only vaguely defined in Hayes and Flower’s model (1980), is only partially studied in Levelt’s model (1989), which restricts itself to lexical and syntactic production. When it comes to development, Bereiter and Scardamalia’s model does not even mention formulation, as though it were not a problem. Berninger and Swanson’s model, on the other hand, gives it pride of place and raises the problem of its development and its gradual coordination with the other components.

• the factors likely to affect the improvement of written composition, have only been broached elusively.Bereiter and Scardamalia (1987) indicate that the adoption of the knowledge-transforming strategy depends on an increase in planning abilities (making it possible to construct increasingly complex goals) and in short-term memory span (for the active maintenance of the constraints inherent to the problem-solving activity). They do not, however, cite any empirical data to support this conception. Nor do they mention the possible impact of instruction and its relationship with increased abilities.

17



• Better defined by Berninger et al.,:- the functioning of these three components is constrained by the writer’s working memory span and metacognitive knowledge,- these two dimensions are responsible for writing development and inter-individual differences,- twofold control of processes via the automation of ‘low-level’ components, which frees up resources and allows a greater number of processes to be engaged, and metacognition, which permits the management of production according to goals and products, is particularly interesting.

• It accounts for the effects of the proceduralization of processes as a result of practice and conscious strategies of process implementation.

18


Experimental example:assessing the development

of expertise

19


Using eye and pen movements to trace the development of writing expertise: case studies of a 7th, 9th and

12th grader, graduate student, and professional writer

Alamargot, D.*, Plane, S.**, Lambert, E.* & Chesnet, D.***

*Laboratory CeRCA, GDR 2657, CNRS - University of Poitiers**Laboratory MoDyCo, GDR 2657, CNRS, IUFM de Paris - University of Paris-Sorbonne

*** MSHS, CNRS - University of Poitiers

(in press) Reading and Writing


Objectives


Aim

‣ To enhance our understanding of the development of writing expertise and associated processing strategies, actually in author, regarded here as a ‘super-expert’.

‣ to clarify our understanding of the relationship between low- and high-level processing, the way it evolves, and the impact it has on the characteristics of the resulting text.

‣ to conduct a more fine-grained description of processing strategies, and their temporal course, a “case study” approach was adopted, whereby a comprehensive range of measures was used to assess processes within four writers with different levels of expertise (from grade 7 to graduate student), compared with an author (super-expert).


Theoretical Framework


Development of text composition

‣ Written production relies on learning. For this very reason, it can always be improved upon, even in adults.

‣ Berninger and Swanson (1994):- elaboration and articulation in WM of cognitive processes of writing

(planning, translating, and reviewing and revising) - (from grade 1 to 9),

- capacity theory: low level vs high level processing

‣ Bereiter and Scardamalia (1987):- beginning writers and older immature writers use the so-called “knowledge-

telling” strategy.

- from 12 years (grade 7) onwards, a more complex and costly strategy gradually emerges, so-called “Knowledge Transforming”, becoming fully operational at around the age of 16 years (high school grades 11-12).

‣ Kellogg (2008):- in adults: “Knowledge crafting”: articulation between text, audience and

knowledge (between 22 and 42 years).


The role of the text-produced-so-far

‣ Adjustment between intention and realization,‣ Reading and modifying the text, creativity based on the previous text.

We believe that the reading of the previous text passes through three successive developmental phases.1. Knowledge-telling strategy (Grades 5 to 7): to compose texts step-by-step, articulating

the different idea units locally as the composition advances. The rereading of the previous text is restricted to the most immediate segments.

2. Knowledge-transforming strategy (Grade 9 to 12, graduate students): to compose a more highly-structured text, with greater overall coherence and therefore a greater element of creativeness. To reread the previous text more frequently, involving large sections of text each time, enable him or her to grasp the content in its entirety.

3. Knowledge crafting strategy (Author and professional writers), can be expected to compose equally creative texts but with less recourse to the previous text. High-level strategies and procedures acquired through practice and experience enable them to memorize ever larger chunks of the previous text (e.g. drawing on long-term working memory) and elaborate coherent, creative, and original texts, relying on rhetorical processes stored in long-term memory.

-> Expected developmental effect (bell curve) for pauses and flows ; reading the text produced so far.


Method


Participants

‣ an author (author and journalist, regarded as a super expert),‣ a graduate student (22-year-old psychology MA student, regarded as an expert),‣ a 12th grader (17-years-old, with intermediate expertise), ‣ a 9th grader (14-years-old, an advanced novice),‣ a 7th grader (12-years-old, a beginning novice),

‣ All were left-handed females following an ordinary curriculum in school or at university (with the exception of the author).


Task

‣ Participants were asked to compose a text by extending a narrative text (Incipit: excerpt taken from «Belle du Seigneur» - A. Cohen).

‣ Neither the duration of composition nor the length of the finished text were imposed. Crossings-out and rewrites were allowed.

As she walked past the library, Aude told herself that only a door stood between her and the man she absolutely needed to have it out with. How she longed to get it over and done with! She had had enough – enough of being persecuted by that smile. He had definitely followed her that morning. She would make it quite clear to him that he had to leave, that it was simply appalling to toy with Jacques and Adrienne in that fashion. With mounting trepidation and the uneasy feeling that she was making a mistake, she pushed the door open. As she crossed the threshold, she experienced an intoxicating thrill and perhaps, too, the dreadful joy of following the wrong path as she had always been destined to do.- ‘I’m disturbing you.’- ‘What?’ he asked, with a mixture of spite, stupefaction, absent-mindedness and consummate cleverness.- ‘I’m disturbing you.’- ‘Yes, yes, please do.’She went up to the shelves and made a pile of books, which promptly collapsed.- ‘You’ve finished your bibliographic research?’ he inquired gravely, giving a mutinous tug to the cord of his moiré dressing gown.She cast around in vain for an insolent rejoinder and moved forward, with absolutely no idea of what she was going to say.

!

Information displayed on the screen during the composition task.


Experimental situation

‣ a Cintiq 18SX LCD tablet (Wacom Company Ltd) synchronized with an Eye Link II eyetracker (SR Research). The Eye and Pen software controlled the apparatus and recorded the flow of eye and pen movements.

!


‘Eye and Pen’ data

The author composing her text.


Measures

‣ Temporal characteristics of the written trace:

‣ Time on task (min),‣ Flow of composition (time taken to write a word, including all

writing pauses - s/word),‣ Execution speed (physical distance covered by the pen - when the

pen tip was in contact with the tablet and moving across it – divided by the writing time - excluding all writing pause),

‣ Pause duration (≥ 15 ms - three successive samples) - the tip of the pen is not in contact with the tablet (no pressure),

‣ Eye parameters: fixation (≥ 100 ms - low fixation in reading):- frequency per word (fixpw)- fixation duration per word (mspw).


Measures

‣ Linguistic-Semantic analysis

‣ Number of ideas per word and number of new ideas per word,‣ Identification of enunciative modalities: absence of presence of:

- narrative plane (narrative in 3rd-person singular past tense),- dialogue between protagonists (direct discourse anchored in

present),- protagonists’ interior discourse, in the narrative past tense.

‣ Introductory mode: The beginning of each text was classified according to the type of compositional process used for this mode (e.g. dialogue).

‣ LSA analysis (latent semantic analysis): assess incipit-script similarity, the LSA distance was computed by means of pairwise comparisons (document-to-document space), using the “Français Total” database. The similarity between the two semantic spaces was rated on a scale of -1 to +1 (Foltz, Kintsch & Landauer, 1998).


Results


Temporal parameters

‣ Overall parameters

Grade 7 Grade 9 Grade 12 Graduate AuthorNumber of words 13.00 155.00 95.00 171.00 145.00Total time on task (min) 22.06 19.25 14.04 11.43 6.49Prewriting duration (min) 1.02 2.29 4.49 2.10 0.96Composition duration (min) 13.78 16.78 9.41 9.27 5.51Postwriting duration (min) 7.27 0.17 0.14 0,06 0.02Flow of composition (s/word) 63.60 6.50 5.95 3.25 2.28Execution speed (cm/s) 2.89 4.78 4.64 5.20 5.71


Temporal parameters

‣ Distribution of pauses (≥ 15 ms)

Composition pause duration and location in the 7th grader’s script - (Eye and Pen© preview function: the diameter of the circle is proportional to the duration of the pause and the centre of the circle represents the precise point at which the pause occurred.

Composition pause duration and location in the 9th grader’s script.


Temporal parameters


Composition pause duration and location in the author’s script.


Temporal parameters


Grade 7 Grade 9 Grade 12 Graduate Author

Mean duration(S.D.)

6220(29687)

1856(5069)

1156(4016)

604(2396)

276(417)

Pause frequency per word (ppw) 4.23 2.54 3.77 3.01 2.57Pause/composition duration % 0.41 0.72 0.73 0.56 0.31Median 515 471 210 167 158Minimum 125 32 16 20 23Maximum 180939 47086 43615 33970 4294Q1 mean duration(S.D.)

189(40)

106(26)

102(39)

81(16)

78(17)

Q2 mean duration(S.D.)

416(93)

277(96)

172(16)

130(19)

129(17)


624(60)

648(111)

409(142)

296(80)

194(25)


23248(56938)

6350(8679)

3922(7368)

1908(4584)

695(669)


Temporal parameters

‣ Fixation (≥ 100 ms) frequency per word for the source and text, according to level of expertise and writing period.

Grade 7 Grade 9 Grade 12 Graduate Author AllPrewriting Incipit 0.46 1.67 2.53 1.46 1.00 1.424Composition Incipit 1.35 3.22 1.29 1.50 1.11 1.694

Text 20.92 5.66 4.40 1.35 1.57 6.78Postwriting Incipit 2.53 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.516

Text 19.54 0.09 0.11 0.02 0.01 3.954All 8.96 2.13 1.67 0.87 0.74

‣ Fixation (≥ 100 ms) duration per word (ms) for the source and text, according to level of expertise and writing period.

Grade 7 Grade 9 Grade 12 Graduate Author AllPrewriting Incipit 206 732 1371 618 294 644Composition Incipit 219 991 513 648 268 528

Text 14688 3859 4237 2161 1695 5328Postwriting Incipit 1341 2 12 8 --- 341

Text 8656 16 27 8 6 1743All 5022 1120 1232 689 566


Temporal parameters

‣ Distribution of fixations (percentage) during compositional pauses (pen raised), according to pause distribution (quartiles), zone (incipit, text, outside) and level of expertise (fixations ≥ 100 ms).

Grade 7 Grade 9 Grade 12 Graduate Author AllQ1 Incipit 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.38 5.45 1.166

Text 0.00 0.46 0.74 5.15 9.09 3.088Averting 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.76 0.00 0.182

Q2 Incipit 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.57 3.94 0.916Text 0.36 0.91 1.03 4.01 8.18 2.898Averting 0.00 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.3 0.178



All Incipit 41.89 36.18 32.8 49.99 25.14 37.2Text 47.59 53.68 59.27 44.09 69.09 54.744Averting 10.52 10.15 7.95 5.91 5.76 8.058


Parallel processing

The author composing her text.


Linguistic-semantic analysis

‣ Analysis of script characteristics (including Latent Semantic Analysis - LSA).


No. ideas 3 29 20 32 28

No. original ideas 2 24 15 20 23

% original ideas 66% 83% 75% 62% 82%

LSA similarity between

incipit and text.55 .68 .70 .69 .76

Enunciative modalities NarrativeNarrative

Dialogue

Narrative

Dialogue

Interior discourse

Narrative

Interior discourse

Narrative

Dialogue

Interior discourse

Introductory modeDirect

dialogue

Direct

dialogue

Reformulated

borrowing then

dialogue

Reformulated

borrowing then

dialogue

Dialogue with topic

change


Interpretation


Developmental ‘bell’ curve

The expected developmental effect (bell curve) on:- the reading of the previous text, and- the production time course (pauses and flows)

turned out to concern solely:- the incipit, and- the reading density (fixations: frequency and duration).

As a result,- only fixation frequency and duration for the incipit displayed an initial rise (in students) and subsequent fall (in adults).- the 12th grader proved to occupy a pivotal position in this developmental trend. Her overall planning of the text, based on a particularly dense reading of the incipit during the prewriting period, allowed her subsequently to compose the text by adopting the same incipit reading mode as the adults.- the latter read the incipit rather more scantily, and partly during graphomotor execution, this being especially true of the author.

Regarding pauses and flows indicators, and the text-produced-so-far, there was a steady:- acceleration in the time course of both low-level processes (short pauses, writing speed) and high-level ones (long pauses),- reduction in reading density for the text produced so far (expertise-related decrease in fixation frequency and duration).


Low level


High level(incipit reading)

TemporalPerformance Complexification

of High-Level processesProceduralization

of High-Level processes

Automatizationof Low-Level processes

Parallel processes


From Grade 7 to 12

With practice and as they move first through junior high, then high school, writers are gradually able to automate the set of low-level processes involved in text production.

- This automatization is reflected in their ability to engage in different processes in parallel, thereby reducing the dispersion of pause durations with expertise.

Furthermore, the gradual acquisition of composition skills allows them to:

- undertake more overall planning, reflected in the present study in longer incipit reading times.

Reading the incipit allows writers not only to familiarize themselves with it but also to elaborate their own text, but this dual task can only be performed once they have attained a certain level of expertise.


For the author (super expert; knowledge-crafting strategy)

A comparison of her performances with those of the graduate student revealed:- a considerable acceleration in the high-level processes: the production flow was particularly fast, the longest pauses (Q4) particularly short and the reading of the previous text (incipit/text produced so far) particularly scant, frequently performed in parallel with the formulation and graphomotor processes.

- in terms of content, the author’s script was clearly the most coherent as well as the most creative. The author treated the incipit as though it were her own and constructed a text that was based on it but also carried it further.

The speed of these processes suggests that, as a result of practice, they had undergone a considerable degree of proceduralization = reducing the cost of processing by allowing the author to retrieve procedures from long-term memory and to implement several different processes simultaneously.

Two consequences: it allows the author:

- to quickly elaborate the text’s overall plan, retain the product of this overall planning in memory and therefore consult the incipit less both before and during composition.

- to read the incipit and the text produced so far whilst writing. She did this more frequently than the graduate student, despite the fact that both adults displayed the same levels of graphomotor automatization and formulation (similar writing speeds and shorter pauses).


Discussion


Case studies: limitation and perspective

While the results paint an interesting and coherent landscape, they cannot be regarded as anything other than a case study-based description.

Nevertheless, understanding the behavior of individual writers, characterized by a degree of uniqueness (notably authors, i.e. super experts), is a legitimate research topic, providing an opportunity to pinpoint specific expert strategies.

Observing an individual is a standard method in cognitive psychology, especially when it comes to modeling complex mental processes (cf. seminal study by Newell & Simon, 1972).

It was this method that gave rise to the developmental approach to text production, as the heuristic model developed by Hayes and Flower (1980) was based on the verbalizations of a single writer while producing an argumentative text.


Factors in the developmentof written composition: maturation and practice

49


Factors in the development of written composition: maturation and practice

• The maturation effect. Increases in working memory and metacognitive capacities

• The learning of written production occurs at a relatively late stage (at around the age of 5-6 years for academic learning) and is spread over time (approximately 10 years for the basic acquisition of composition)

• This learning is reliant on the child’s general abilities, notably the development of working memory processing and storage, and the development of metacognitive and metalinguistic abilities (Kellogg, 2008).

• Here, once more, in line with the maturation hypothesis of working memory development, relations between metacognition and writing processes in writers aged 14-15 years and above has remained largely unexplored until now.

50


Factors in the development of written composition: maturation and practice

• The practice effect. Supports and training.• In developmental models, the question of instruction and the hopefully inevitable effects

it has on production processes and performances is generally left to one side, as though the evolution that is observed had a ‘natural and predetermined’ character.

• Instructed and related practice play a central role in the learning and development of written production. It can be regarded as a second factor for development, interacting with – or at the very least acting alongside – maturation.

• These varied interventions may involve different processing levels (graphomotor skills, spelling, text), different processes (planning, formulation, revision) or even the overall management of the activity (self-regulation: Graham and Harris, 1996).

• Two categories: support and training.- They should be further defined, according to whether they are intended to improve a particular writing process (planning, translating, revision, graphomotor execution) or the way in which all the writing processes are managed (control and monitoring).- Supports are generally used to make controlled processes easier (high-level processes: planning, revision), whereas training is intended to bring about the automation or proceduralization of lower-level processes (spelling, graphomotor execution).

51


General conclusion

52


General conclusion

• Studying written formulation• Teaching formulation• Understanding the impact of other types of acquisition and knowledge:

the notion of pacemaker

• Understanding the impact of the activity itself: the epistemic effect of monitoring

53


Modelling the Development of Written...

Documents

Transcript of Modelling the Development of Written...