Longitudinal relationships of levels of language in writing and between writing and reading in grades 1 to 7.

Abstract

Longitudinal structural equation modeling was used to evaluate longitudinal relationships across adjacent grade levels 1 to 7 for levels of language in writing (Model 1, subword letter writing, word spelling, and text composing) or writing and reading (Model 2, subword letter writing and word spelling and reading; Model 3, word spelling and reading and text composing and comprehending). Significant longitudinal relationships were observed within and across levels of language: spelling to spelling and spelling to composing (Grades 1 to 7), Models 1 and 3, and composing to spelling (Grades 3 to 6, Model 1; Grades 4 to 6, Model 3); spelling to word reading and word reading to spelling (Grades 2 to 7), Models 2 and 3; spelling to word reading (Grade 1), Model 2, and word reading to spelling (Grade 1), Model 3; composition to comprehension (Grades 3 to 5), Model 3; comprehension to composition (Grades 2 to 6), Model 3; and comprehension to word reading (Grades 1 to 6), Model 3. Results are discussed in reference to the levels of language in translating ideas into written language and integrating writing and reading.Learning to write, that is, to produce legible letters and conventional spellings and create coherent written texts for many specific assignments across the curriculum, is a major task of early and middle childhood for children educated in schools. Children who do not master writing are at risk for grade retention and may not graduate because they cannot complete written assignments and take tests. Also, they may not pass high-stakes tests, which increasingly require writing (Jenkins, Johnson, & Hileman, 2004). However, there is relatively little research on the normal writing development process with which to inform educational policy, assessment, and instruction related to writing. Of the research that does exist on writing development, most of it provides (a) a snapshot of the writing process at a specific point in time or (b) a cross-sectional comparison of different children at different phases of writing development. Few longitudinal studies of writing exist, or, as Lerkkanen, Rasku-Puttonen, Aunola, and Nurmi (2004) pointed out, if the same children were tested repeatedly, the results have often been analyzed in cross-sectional fashion (e.g., . Moreover, comparatively little research has focused on writing alone. The research on writing that does exist is often focused on writing-reading relationships (Fitzgerald & Shanahan, 2000). As explained later in this section, research focused on writing alone is typically grounded in the cognitive processes of writing, such as planning, translating, and reviewing/revising, rather than on the levels of language involved in translating ideas into written products."Levels of language" is a well-established analytic tool in linguistics that is used to understand how complex, multidimensional language is structured in the mind and in the language constructions of language users (e.g., Berninger & Garvey, 1982). Linguists analyze and code different levels of langua...

Examining the transcription-writing link: Effects of handwriting fluency and spelling accuracy on writing performance via planning and translating in middle grades

“…The full model accounted for about half of the total variance in writing performance. Together, these results are consistent with the view that transcription, planning, and translating are crucial for good writing (Abbott et al, 2010;Berninger & Winn, 2006;Hayes & Flower, 1980;Kellogg, 1996;Kim et al, 2011;Limpo & Alves, 2013a). …”

The Effects of Manuscript, Cursive or Manuscript/Cursive Styles on Writing Development in Grade 2

“…When students write in cursive, the very nature of this style allows them to memorize and recall the word unit more easily, as opposed to manuscript style---all letters of one word are tied together. According to Abbott, Berninger, and Fayol (2010) who find a strong relationship between word performance and text production, new research should explore the impact of integrated instructional programs on writing abilities (integrating word instruction with composition instruction or integrating word instruction with handwriting instruction). Based on our study, we agree with Abbott et al (2010) that "cross-cultural studies should compare handwriting's development and its longitudinal relationships to those of other writing skills in countries that systematically vary in the consistency of handwriting instruction provided across the grades" (p. 294).…”

Exploration of self-expression to improve L2 writing skills

“…This is to suggest that writers begin to focus on text cohesion (McCutchen, 1986;Witte & Faigley, 1981), syntactic structures (Hunt, 1965; McCutchen & Perfetti, 1982), and cognitive strategies such as planning and revising (Abbott et al, 2010;Berninger et al, 1991). Based on these insights conventional wisdom dictates that teachers should follow a process approach to writing by following the stages of planning, drafting and revising: in that order.…”

“…Caught in a world of electronic gadgetry, visual culture and information overload, they neither appreciate the educational value of writing nor do they understand the sense of personal gratification it may instil in them.We are aware that learning to write often begins with the mastery of producing legible letters and basic spelling (Abbott, Berninger & Fayol, 2010) and that once these skills are attained, young writers attempt to master basic grammar and sentence structure. This is to suggest that writers begin to focus on text cohesion (McCutchen, 1986;Witte & Faigley, 1981), syntactic structures (Hunt, 1965; McCutchen & Perfetti, 1982), and cognitive strategies such as planning and revising (Abbott et al, 2010;Berninger et al, 1991).…”