Sixth graders’ selection and integration when writing from multiple online texts

Abstract

This study examined students’ ability to select relevant ideas from multiple online texts and integrate those ideas in their written products. Students (N = 162) used a web-based platform to complete an online inquiry task in which they read three texts presenting different perspectives on computer gaming and wrote an article for a school magazine on the issue based on these texts. Students selected two snippets from each text during reading and wrote their article with the selected snippets available. The selected snippets were scored according to their relevance for completing the task, and the written products were scored according to their integration quality. The results showed that most students performed well on the selection task. However, nearly half of the written products were characterized by poor integration quality. The hierarchical multiple regression analysis showed that students’ selection of relevant ideas from the texts contributed to their integration of information across texts over and above both reading fluency and reading comprehension skills. The study provides new evidence on the relationship between selection and integration when younger students work with multiple texts, and both theoretical and educational implications of these findings are discussed.

The association between sourcing skills and intertextual integration in lower secondary school students

“…In fact, they may be a basis for thinking about building targeted educational interventions to improve multipledocument comprehension skills in lower secondary school students. The results of previous studies (Kullberg et al, 2023) also suggest that students need guidance in intertextual integration. Many interventions separately enhance sourcing skills and intertextual integration skills (Barzilai et al, 2018).…”

Measuring multiple-source based academic writing self-efficacy

“…As no prior writing self-efficacy measure to the best of our knowledge focused on this particular process within academic writing (for review of existing writing self-efficacy measures, see Abdel Latif, 2021 ), we consulted the literature on synthesis writing ( Spivey and King, 1989 ; Segev-Miller, 2007 ; Solé et al, 2013 ; Vandermeulen et al, 2020a , b ) as well as on written task products used for comprehension assessment within multiple document literacy (e.g., Ferguson and Bråten, 2013 ; Barzilai and Ka’adan, 2017 ; Du and List, 2020 ; McCarthy et al, 2022 ; Kullberg et al, 2023 ) in developing the items for our measure. In brief, these items were developed to represent a core process in writing synthesis texts and communicating an integrated understanding based on multiple source reading, with different aspects of this process, such as dealing with inconsistencies, explaining similarities and differences between perspectives, creating overview and comprehensiveness, and producing a new, original text, presumably captured by the items.…”

“…As these sources often present complementary (information across different sources is part of a larger whole not specified in any single source) or conflicting information, student writers are tasked with synthesizing or integrating information across different perspectives and arguments to demonstrate their writing competence or communicate their understanding. Such multiple-source based, integrated academic writing tasks have been found to represent a formidable challenge across educational levels that may require particular instructional interventions ( Mateos et al, 2018 ; Weston-Sementelli et al, 2018 ; Granado-Peinado et al, 2019 ; Du and List, 2020 ; Kiili et al, 2020 ; Marttunen and Kiili, 2022 ; Barzilai et al, 2023 ; Kullberg et al, 2023 ; Vandermeulen et al, 2023a ). As such, they can also be assumed to require considerable motivation on the part of the students, not least with respect to their confidence in their ability to successfully complete such tasks (i.e., their self-efficacy beliefs; Bandura, 1997 ).…”

“…That is, although writing tasks have quite often been used as post-reading assessment tools targeting multiple text comprehension in this area of research ( Barzilai et al, 2018 ; Primor and Katzir, 2018 ), it seems fair to say that the attention to writing per se has been rather modest ( McNamara and Allen, 2018 ; McCarthy et al, 2022 ). Accordingly, the lack of integration commonly observed in students’ writing task products (e.g., Anmarkrud et al, 2014 ; Du and List, 2020 ; Kiili et al, 2020 ; Kullberg et al, 2023 ) has typically been interpreted as an issue related to reading comprehension rather than writing competence within multiple text comprehension ( McNamara and Allen, 2018 ; McCarthy et al, 2022 ). That said, in a recent study, McCarthy et al (2022) demonstrated that students’ writing ability may be a unique predictor of their multiple text comprehension when the latter was assessed with a multiple-source based writing task.…”