Envisioning multilingualism in source-based writing in L1, L2, and L3: The relation between source use and text quality

Abstract

In this article, we report on a study that investigates how master’s students consult external sources for reading-to-write integrated tasks in their L1 (Dutch), L2 (English), and L3 (French). Two hundred and eighty master’s students in professional communication wrote synthesis texts based on three external sources, including a report, a web text, and a newspaper article in their L1 (Dutch), and in L2 (English), or L3 (French) at two moments of measurement, which were separated by an interval of 6 months. Their source use activities during the writing process were registered using Inputlog – a keylogging program. Inputlog enabled us to determine the amount of time the writers spent composing their main texts and consulting the sources (when the source consultation activities took place during the writing process, which sources were consulted most frequently, and how frequently the writers transitioned between the various sources). Final text quality was assessed holistically using pairwise comparisons (D-pac, now Comproved). Confirmatory factor analysis indicated three components that could describe source use processes in L1, L2, and L3 writing: (a) initial reading time, (b) source interaction, and (c) variance of source use throughout the writing process. Within-subject comparisons revealed that there were no improvements in the students’ text quality in L1, L2, and L3 over an academic year. Structural equation modeling indicated that the source use approach, particularly source interaction, is related to text quality, but only in L1 and L3. We provide further explanations for this variation based on language proficiency, temporal distribution of writing process, and individual differences.

One Mind, Many Languages: Czech as an Additional Language in Plurilingual Repertoires

“…In addition to the areas of language addressed by the questionnaire, the learners' spontaneous reference to the sociocultural dimension of communication underscores the importance of sociocultural awareness in developing effective language skills. This result encourages further exploration of higher-level language competencies, such as strategic dimensions and pragmatics, in line with suggestions by Chau et al (2022). North et al, 2022;Piccardo et al, 2021).…”

“…This finding underscores the need to consider the influence of one's native language, not only in terms of potential transfer but also in understanding the dynamics of language interactions in a multilingual context. Chau et al (2022) emphasized the need for further investigation into cross-linguistic transfer in the context of third language acquisition, highlighting that the existing body of L3 research has primarily concentrated on low-level language components, such as vocabulary and syntax, as evidenced by the studies discussed above. Their study explored the text quality of master's students in professional communication as they engaged in reading-to-write integrated tasks in their L1 (Dutch), L2 (English), and L3…”

Introduction to the special issue on synthesis tasks: where reading and writing meet

“…The logging data are time-coded and can be analyzed in different ways providing insights into several aspects of the writing process (Leijten & Van Waes, 2013). Previous studies on synthesis writing using keystroke logging have provided information on the use of sources during the writing process (Chau et al, 2022;Leijten et al, 2017;Vandermeulen, van den Broek, et al, 2020c;. The study by Valenzuela and Castillo (2022) in this special issue adds to existing keystroke logging studies on source-based writing by not only looking into reading times and switches between production and reading, but also by focusing on pausing behavior during production.…”

Problem-solving activity during the foreign language writing process: A proposal for categorisation and visualisation of source use and a new take on fluency in multilingual writing

“…In a context where multilingualism is in the spotlight (May 2013), it is curious to note that even academic writing in FL English has not been studied notably in environments where English is not the surrounding language (Langum and Sullivan 2020), not to speak of writing in other languages. Studies on the activation of other languages in L3+ use have almost exclusively designed tasks where the use of external help is not allowed; Chau et al (2022) also point to the lack of processoriented research on source use in writing, which complicates explaining and contrasting findings. In studies of crosslinguistic interaction, picture telling and argumentative tasks based on personal opinion and knowledge have been popular (Cenoz andGorter 2011, Orcasitas-Vicandi 2021).…”

“…Some of the following example studies have been selected because of they focus on multilinguals, and specifically source use during writing. Others are not necessarily multilingual, but have proportioned means to visualise the process and, therefore, serve as examples of approaches taken so far: Chau et al 2022 had a research design quite similar to the one reported in this article. They used Inputlog for a synthesis writing task whose aim was to compare students' behavior writing texts in three languages (L1 Dutch, L2 English, L3 French, each text in a different target language).…”