Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Direct and indirect effects of independent language skills on the integrated writing performance of Chinese-speaking students with low proficiency

  • Published:
Reading and Writing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Integrated writing is increasingly used in language assessment programmes. As a hybrid task, it requires students to coordinate different language skills, i.e. listening, reading and writing, to retrieve information from multiple sources, and compose an essay for a specific purpose. Tapping into the varied skills that contribute to successful integrated writing is especially beneficial for low proficiency students. However, the mechanisms underlying the impact of these skills on integrated writing performance have yet to be thoroughly studied. This study sampled 103 first-year undergraduate students in Hong Kong who showed relatively low proficiency in Chinese language. They completed three independent tasks measuring their listening, reading, and writing skills; an integrated listening-reading-writing task; and an integrated writing strategy use questionnaire. The results indicated that together, the independent skills accounted for 29.5% of the variance in integrated writing performance, suggesting that integrated writing is a skill that goes far beyond the simple combination of listening, reading, and writing. Independent writing showed the strongest correlation with integrated writing, while both independent listening and independent writing exerted direct and indirect effects on integrated writing performance. However, the effect of reading on integrated writing performance was insignificant, even though the two were significantly correlated. These results offer insights into the complex relationships between the skills. The findings enrich our understanding of the construct of integrated writing, as well as suggest strategies for teaching less proficient learners.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The HKDSE adopts standard-referenced reporting for test-takers. Students’ performance in each subject is reported using a five-level scale with level 5 being awarded to best-performing students and level 1 indicating “Unclassified.” The scale is applied in each test paper and an overall level is also generated based on students’ performance in all test papers.

References

  • Alexander, P. A., & Jetton, T. L. (2000). Learning from text: A multidimensional and developmental perspective. In M.L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol.3, pp. 285–310). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

  • Anmarkrud, Ø., Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2014). Multiple-documents literacy: Strategic processing, source awareness, and argumentation when reading multiple conflicting documents. Learning and Individual Differences, 30, 64–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asención Delaney, Y. (2008). Investigating the reading-to-write construct. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7(3), 140–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2008.04.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basaraba, D., Yovanoff, P., Alonzo, J., & Tindal, G. (2013). Examining the structure of reading comprehension: Do literal, inferential, and evaluative comprehension truly exist? Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 26(3), 349–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. L. Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bråten, I., Anmarkrud, Ø., Brandmo, C., & Strømsø, H. I. (2014). Developing and testing a model of direct and indirect relationships between individual differences, processing, and multiple-text comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 30, 9–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.11.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan, S. (2017). Using keystroke logging to understand writers’ processes on a reading-into-writing test. Language Testing in Asia, 7(1), 1–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheong, C. M., Zhu, X., & Liao, X. (2018). Differences between the relationship of L1 learners’ performance in integrated writing with both independent listening and independent reading cognitive skills. Reading and Writing, 31, 779–811. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-017-9811-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, A. D. (2010). Focus on the language learner: Styles, strategies and motivation. In R. Schmidt (Ed.), An introduction to applied linguistics. (pp. 161–178). London: Hodder Education.

  • Coker, D. L., Jr., Jennings, A. S., Farley-Ripple, E., & MacArthur, C. A. (2018). The type of writing instruction and practice matters: The direct and indirect effects of writing instruction and student practice on reading achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 110(4), 502–517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cumming, A., Kantor, R., Baba, K., Erdosy, U., Eouanzoui, K., & James, M. (2005). Differences in written discourse in independent and integrated prototype tasks for next generation TOEFL. Assessing Writing, 10(1), 5–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cumming, A., Lai, C., & Cho, H. (2016). Students’ writing from sources for academic purposes: A synthesis of recent research. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 23, 47–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Milliano, I. I. C. M. (2013). Literacy development of low-achieving adolescents. The role of engagement in academic reading and writing (dissertation). Amsterdam:  University of Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Du, H., & List, A. (2020). Researching and writing based on multiple texts. Learning and Instruction, 66, 101297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitzgerald, J., & Shanahan, T. (2000). Reading and writing relations and their development. Educational Psychologist, 35(1), 39–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gebril, A., & Plakans, L. (2013). Toward a transparent construct of reading-to-write tasks: The interface between discourse features and proficiency. Language Assessment Quarterly, 10(1), 9–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goh, C. C. (2000). A cognitive perspective on language learners’ listening comprehension problems. System, 28(1), 55–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, S. R., Braasch, J. L., Wiley, J., Graesser, A. C., & Brodowinska, K. (2012). Comprehending and learning from Internet sources: Processing patterns of better and poorer learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 47(4), 356–381.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., & Hebert, M. (2010). Writing to read: Evidence for how writing can improve reading. Alliance for Excellent Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guo, L., Crossley, S. A., & McNamara, D. S. (2013). Predicting human judgments of essay quality in both integrated and independent second language writing samples: A comparison study. Assessing Writing, 18(3), 218–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2013.05.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis. (8th ed.). Cengage Learning EMEA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartman, H. J. (2001). Developing students’ metacognitive knowledge and skills. In H. J. Hartman (Ed). Metacognition in learning and instruction (pp. 33–68). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

  • Hayes, A. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cut-off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hyland, T. A. (2009). Drawing a line in the sand: Identifying the borderzone between self and other in EL1 and EL2 citation practices. Assessing Writing, 14(1), 62–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2009.01.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Y.-S.G. (2016). Direct and mediated effects of language and cognitive skills on comprehension of oral narrative texts (listening comprehension) for children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 141, 101–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95(2), 163–182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, P. D., & Kirkpatrick, L. C. (2010). A framework for content area writing: Mediators and moderators. Journal of Writing Research, 2(1), 1–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewkowicz, J. (1994). Writing from Sources: Does Source Material Help or Hinder Students' Performance? Paper presented at the Annual International Language in Education Conference, Hong Kong.

  • Li, Y., & Casanave, C. P. (2012). Two first-year students’ strategies for writing from sources: Patchwriting or plagiarism? Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(2), 165–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.03.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. (2007). Mediation analysis. Annual Reviews of. Psychology, 58, 593–614.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martínez, I., Mateos Sanz, M. D. M., Martín, E., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (2015). Learning history by composing synthesis texts: Effects of an instructional programme on learning, reading and writing processes, and text quality. Journal of Writing Research, 7(2), 275–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies. Newbury House Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plakans, L., & Gebril, A. (2013). Using multiple texts in an integrated writing assessment: Source text use as a predictor of score. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(3), 217–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plakans, L., & Gebril, A. (2017). An assessment perspective on argumentation in writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 100(36), 85–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plakans, L., Liao, J.-T., & Wang, F. (2019). “I should summarize this whole paragraph”: Shared processes of reading and writing in iterative integrated assessment tasks. Assessing Writing, 40, 14–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2019.03.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal Protocols of Reading: The Nature of Constructively Responsive Reading. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz-Funes, M. (2001). Task representation in foreign language reading-to-write. Foreign Language Annals, 34(3), 226–234. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2001.tb02404.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sawaki, Y., Quinlan, T., & Lee, Y.-W. (2013). Understanding learner strengths and weaknesses: Assessing performance on an integrated writing task. Language Assessment Quarterly, 10(1), 73–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2011.633305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shanahan, T. (2006). Relations among oral language, reading, and writing development. In C. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research. (pp. 171–183). Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shanahan, T. (2016). Relationships between reading and writing development. In C. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of Writing Research. (2nd ed., pp. 194–207). Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shin, S.-Y., & Ewert, D. (2015). What accounts for integrated reading-to-write task scores? Language Testing, 32(2), 259–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Solé, I., Miras, M., Castells, N., Espino, S., & Minguela, M. (2013). Integrating information: An analysis of the processes involved and the products generated in a written synthesis task. Written Communication, 30(1), 63–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088312466532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spivey, N. N. (1984). Discourse synthesis: Constructing texts in reading and writing. (Outstanding Dissertation Monograph Series). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

  • Spivey, N. N. (1990). Transforming texts: Constructive processes in reading and writing. Written Communication, 7(2), 256–287. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088390007002004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spivey, N. N. (1997). The constructivist metaphor: Reading, writing and the making of meaning. Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trites, L., & McGroarty, M. (2005). Reading to learn and reading to integrate: New tasks for reading comprehension tests? Language Testing, 22(2), 174–210. https://doi.org/10.1191/0265532205lt299oa.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Weijen, D., Rijlaarsdam, G., & van Den Bergh, H. (2018). Source use and argumentation behavior in L1 and L2 writing: A within-writer comparison. Reading and Writing. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-018-9842-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vandergrift, L. (2007). Recent developments in second and foreign language listening comprehension research. Language Teaching, 40(3), 191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vandermeulen, N., van den Broek, B., Van Steendam, E., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (2020). In search of an effective source use pattern for writing argumentative and informative synthesis texts. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 33(2), 239–266. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-019-09958-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watanabe Y (2001) Read-to-write tasks for the assessment of second language academic writing skills: Investigating text features and rater reactions. (PhD Dissertation), University of Hawaii at Manoa.

  • Weir, C. J. (2005). Language testing and validation : An evidence-based approach. Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, H.-C. (2014). Toward a model of strategies and summary writing performance. Language Assessment Quarterly, 11(4), 403–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, H.-C., & Plakans, L. (2012). Second language writers’ strategy use and performance on an integrated reading-listening-writing task. TESOL Quarterly: A Journal for Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages and of Standard English as a Second Dialect, 46(1), 80–103. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, L., & Shi, L. (2003). Exploring six MBA students’ summary writing by introspection. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2(3), 165–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1475-1585(03)00016-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu, G. (2008). Reading to summarize in English and Chinese: A tale of two languages? Language Testing, 25(4), 521–551. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532208094275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, X., & Wu, Y. L. (2013). Secondary school students' difficulties and learning expectation in integrated Chinese Language tasks in Hong Kong. Education Journal, 41(1–2), 27–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, X., Li, X., Yu, G., Cheong, C. M., & Liao, X. (2016). Exploring the relationships between independent listening and listening-reading-writing tasks in Chinese language testing: Toward a better understanding of the construct underlying integrated writing tasks. Language Assessment Quarterly, 13(3), 167–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2016.1210609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, X., Liao, X., & Cheong, C. M. (2019). Strategy use in oral communication with competent synthesis and complex interaction. Journal of psycholinguistic research, 48(5), 1163–1183. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-019-09651-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, X., Li, G. Y., Cheong, C. M., Yu, G., & Liao, X. (2021). Secondary school students’ discourse synthesis performance on Chinese (L1) and English (L2) integrated writing assessments. Reading and Writing, 34, 49–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-020-10065-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zohar, A., & Dori, Y. J. (2003). Higher order thinking skills and low-achieving students: Are they mutually exclusive? The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(2), 145–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

We would like to thank all the participants involved. We would also like to thank Dr Lan Yang and Ms Yaping Liu for their suggestions and assistance in the data analysis. We had valuable comments from the journal’s editor Professor R.M. Joshi, and the anonymous reviewers, for which we are very grateful too.

Funding

This work was partially supported by Internal Research Grant (IRG) (Ref. RG52/18-19R) of The Education University of Hong Kong; CBS L&T Project (CBS/1516/XZ) of The Hong Kong Polytechnic University.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Chinese Language Studies, The Education University of Hong Kong, Tai Po, Hong Kong

    Xian Liao

  2. Department of Chinese and Bilingual Studies, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Hong Kong

    Xinhua Zhu

  3. Faculty of Education, The University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong

    Choo Mui Cheong

Authors
  1. Xian Liao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Xinhua Zhu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Choo Mui Cheong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Choo Mui Cheong.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Appendix 1 Sample questions used in the independent reading task
Full size table
Appendix 2 Sample questions used in the independent listening task
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Liao, X., Zhu, X. & Cheong, C.M. Direct and indirect effects of independent language skills on the integrated writing performance of Chinese-speaking students with low proficiency. Read Writ 34, 2529–2557 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-021-10152-7

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-021-10152-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation