31 SES 06 A, Studies on Developing Writing Skills
The act of writing requires different operations, which occur simultaneously (Cassany, 1999; Hayes, 2006). These operations are not only related to textual editing processes specific to writing, also need skills of planning and revising, both involving high levels of self-regulation (Castelló, 2002). Students who could be considered as good writers have fewer mistakes in their texts (Ferrari, Bouffard & Rainville, 1998). If Primary Education students do not have the requirements to get each of the processes involved in writing skill, they will have problems when they write a text. As an example, some students could not know the gender structure of the text; others could have problems with creativity or coherently organization of a text. In addition, they could have difficulties with grammar, spelling, vocabulary or syntactic constructions. However, some kinds of texts, like short story, are easier to write. For this reason, it has been selected for this research. Narrations are easy to write because they are related to the writers' previous cognitive structures (Graesser et al., 1994) and they have an episodic nature (Singer, Harkness & Stewart, 1997). This simple writing process could benefit to the quality of the texts. However, when a person write a text is not just enough to know the structure of a text genre is also necessary to consider spelling (Jimenez & Muñetón, 2002). Others authors believe it is important to evaluate other aspects such as grammar and text structure (Cassany, 1999). The criteria for assessing a creative text must be different to those used to evaluate other types of text, as elements to write are also different (Morales, 2004).
Several authors have created proposals for assessing narrative texts, as PROESC proposed by Cuetos, Ramos & Ruano (2002) or the rubric for assessing narrative texts proposed by Montanero, Lucero & Fernandez (2014). Benítez (2008) created a tool to assess short stories through a group of criteria like theme, characters, context of the story, plot and other linguistic aspects (grammar, vocabulary...). Ochoa-Angrino et al. (2008) created a planning and evaluation tool for writing stories. Other authors developed a rubric formed by seven different criteria (with four levels of assessment) to evaluate the quality of a text (Yan et al., 2012). The results of this research showed that the girls were significantly better than boys in text quality. This trend related to gender has been observed in other studies realized in Primary Education (Berninger & Fuller, 1992) and in Secondary Education (Berninger, Whitaker, Feng, Swanson & Abbott, 1996). Berninger & Fuller (1992) researched gender differences in oral and written fluency. In this study, participated 300 children (150 boys and 150 girls). The results showed that boys were significantly better than girls in oral fluency and girls were better than boys in written fluency. However, there are more aspects to be consider when we assess a short story, as the organizational aspects of a narrative text.
In this framework about written texts production, it has been found differences in the composition of stories based on gender; some researchers found them in Primary Education, while others have obtained these differences since Secondary Education. Therefore, the main objective of this study is to explore if there are quality differences between narrative texts written by boys and girls who are studying Primary Education. If there are differences based on gender, we want to know in which aspects boys and girls are different.
Benítez, R. (2008). La evaluación de las narraciones escritas: una perspectiva holística focalizada. Enunciación, 13, 28-37. Berninger, V. et al. (1996). Assessment of planning, translating, and revising in junior high writers. Journal of School Psychology, 34, 23−52. Berninger, V. W. & Fuller, F. (1992). Gender Differences in Orthographic, Verbal, and Compositional Fluency: Implications for Assessing Writing Disabilities in Primary Grade Children. Journal of School Psychology, 30, 363-382. Cassany, D. (1999). Construir la escritura. Barcelona: Paidós. Castelló, M. (2002). De la investigación sobre el proceso de composición a la enseñanza de la escritura. Revista Signos, 35(51–52), 149–162 Cho, K. &, MacArthur, C (2010). Student revision with peer and expert reviewing. Learning and Instruction, 20, 328-338. Cuetos, F., Ramos, J.L. & Ruano, E. (2002). PROESC: Batería de evaluación de los procesos de escritura. Madrid: TEA Ediciones. Fernández, M. J. (2014). Género y escritura creativa: estudio comparativo entre el alum-nado de Educación Primaria y estudiantes universitarios. INFAD. Revista de Psicolo-gía, 1 (1), 93-104. Ferrari, M., Bouffard, T. y Rainville, L. (1998). What makes a good writer? Differences in good and poor writers’ self-regulation of writing. Instructional Science, 26(6), 473-488. Graesser, A.C., Singer, M. & Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences during narra-tive text comprehension. Psychological Review, 101(3), 371-395. Hayes, J. (1996). A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing. En C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.). The science of writing. Theories, methods, indi-vidual differences and applications (pp. 1-27). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Jiménez, J.E. & Muñetón, M. A. (2002). Dificultades de aprendizaje de la escritura. Aplicaciones de la Psicolingüística y de las nuevas tecnologías. Madrid: Trotta. Liang, M-Y. (2010). using synchronous online peer response groups in EFL writing: revision-related discourse. Language Learning & Technology, 14(1), 45-64. Montanero, M., Lucero, M. y Fernández, M. J. (2014). Iterative co-evaluation with a rubric of narrative texts in Primary Education. I&A, 37 (1), 184-220. Morales, F. (2004). Evaluar la escritura, sí…Pero ¿Qué y cómo evaluar?. Acción Pedagógica, 13 (1), 38-48. Ochoa-Angrino, S. et al. (2008). Funcionamiento metacognitivo de niños escolares en la escritura de un texto narrativo antes y después de una pauta de corrección conjunta, Acta Colombiana de Psicología, 11 (2), 77-88. Singer, M., Harkness, D., & Stewart, S. T. (1997). Constructing inferences in expository text comprehension. Discourse Processes, 24, 199-228. Yan, C. M. W., et al. (2012). Writing quality in Chinese children: speed and fluency matter. Reading and Writing, 25 (7), 1499-1521.
00. Central Events (Keynotes, EERA-Panel, EERJ Round Table, Invited Sessions)
Network 1. Continuing Professional Development: Learning for Individuals, Leaders, and Organisations
Network 2. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)
Network 3. Curriculum Innovation
Network 4. Inclusive Education
Network 5. Children and Youth at Risk and Urban Education
Network 6. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Network 7. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Network 8. Research on Health Education
Network 9. Assessment, Evaluation, Testing and Measurement
Network 10. Teacher Education Research
Network 11. Educational Effectiveness and Quality Assurance
Network 12. LISnet - Library and Information Science Network
Network 13. Philosophy of Education
Network 14. Communities, Families and Schooling in Educational Research
Network 15. Research Partnerships in Education
Network 16. ICT in Education and Training
Network 17. Histories of Education
Network 18. Research in Sport Pedagogy
Network 19. Ethnography
Network 20. Research in Innovative Intercultural Learning Environments
Network 22. Research in Higher Education
Network 23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Network 24. Mathematics Education Research
Network 25. Research on Children's Rights in Education
Network 26. Educational Leadership
Network 27. Didactics – Learning and Teaching
The programme is updated regularly (each day in the morning)
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.