Explore the vast range of titles available.

Focusing on metadiscourse markers during EFL writing classes has garnered research attention, yet few studies were conducted on online expository writing. This study explores the effect of metadiscourse markers instruction on expository writing of 80 male and female EFL learners in the school context, selected through convenience sampling and an interview followed with a smaller number of participants. Initially, the eighty participants were assigned to experimental (n=40) and control (n=40) groups after checking homogeneity in terms of English proficiency level. The participants in the experimental group received explicit instruction of markers, whereas the control group received the conventional curriculum-based writing instruction that included similar material/topics, except for the explicit focus on metadiscourse markers, all through a uniform digital platform mandated in the state-run schools. The frequency/use of metadiscourse markers in the writing assignments of the participants per session and the total was noted, and then a corpus of 80 collected essays was analyzed by a trained rater and researcher to both analyze whether metadiscourse markers instruction had any significant effect on expository writings and to determine which metadiscourse markers showed up in the texts written by students more. Finally, a semi-structured interview was conducted with eight EFL instructors to explore their attitudes. Statistical test of Analysis of Covariance showed a significant effect of metadiscourse markers instruction on EFL learners’ expository writing. Another finding was that participants employed interactional metadiscourse markers frequently. Implications for policy-makers, students, and teachers indicate that free access to online writing resources improves learning perceptions/outcomes.

Inferential comprehension is necessary to connect ideas in a text together in a meaningful manner. There have been multiple studies on inferential comprehension involving texts of different genres (narrative and expository), but not a coherent overview of the findings of inferential comprehension by genre. The purpose of this study is to provide a coherent overview by conducting a meta-analysis of the findings of inferential comprehension by genre. A systematic review of the literature yielded 18 reports with 19 independent studies involving 1714 participants in which inferential comprehension was compared by genre. Based on robust variance estimation, scores on measures of inferential comprehension were higher for narrative texts than expository texts (g = .36, p = .02). This effect did not vary depending on whether inferential comprehension was assessed during or after reading, whether the texts for each genre were matched for readability, whether the reader was an adult or child, and whether the inference connected different ideas in the text (text connecting) or the text to background knowledge (knowledge based). Potential explanations of genre differences in inferential comprehension and future directions for research are discussed.

We compared short stories by autistic (n = 19) and non-autistic (n = 23) university students. We used automated software and content analysis to code students’ stories. We found that writings were more similar than different. However, autistic students’ stories were rated at a higher reading level (p = .013) than non-autistic students’. Autistic students’ stories contained fewer grammatical errors (p = .02) but were less likely to include a climax (p = .026). Autistic students reported more positive writing affect than non-autistic students (p = .026). Higher writing affect was associated with writing highly fictional texts (p = .03) that contained more sentences (p = .005). Findings suggest writing may be a strength for autistic students and opportunities to write creatively may promote positive affect toward writing.

Using detailed linguistic analysis, this study examined the expository writing abilities of school-age children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in comparison to neurotypical (NT) children. Associations between executive functioning (EF) and writing ability in children with and without ASD were also explored. Compared to NT peers, children with ASD wrote shorter expository texts that contained more grammatical errors, and needed more assistance from the experimenter to complete the writing assessment. However, the texts of children with and without ASD did not differ in their lexical diversity, use of writing conventions, and overall quality. Analyses also revealed that greater EF was associated with better writing outcomes in both groups. Educational implications of these findings are discussed.

This meta-analysis synthesizes results from expository text structure interventions designed to increase comprehension for students in kindergarten to grade 12 published between 1970 and 2013. Twenty-one studies were identified, 19 of which met criteria for a meta-analysis, including 48 studywise effect sizes that were meta-analyzed to determine (a) how effective expository text structure interventions are in improving comprehension and (b) what features of expository text structure interventions (e.g., number of text structures taught, type of implementer) are associated with improved comprehension outcomes. A random-effects analysis yielded a significant mean effect of .95 overall and a significant mean effect of 1 for researcherdeveloped comprehension measures. Moderator analyses indicated significant differences in student comprehension outcomes, favoring researchers as implementers, 11-20 hours of interventions, one or two text structures taught, and students in the elementary grades. Instructional features of expository text structure interventions and implications for research and practice are discussed.

Generative learning theory posits that learners engage more deeply and produce better learning outcomes when they engage in selecting, organizing, and integrating processes during learning. The present experiments examine whether the generative learning activity of generating explanations can be extended to online multimedia lessons and whether prompts to engage in this generative learning activity work better than more passive instruction. Across three experiments, college students learned about greenhouse gasses from a 4-part online lesson involving captioned animations and subsequently took a posttest. After each part, learners were asked to generate an explanation (write-an-explanation), write an explanation using provided terms (write-a-focused-explanation), rewrite a provided explanation (rewrite-an-explanation), read a provided explanation (read-an-explanation), or simply move on to the next part (no-activity). Overall, students in the write-an-explanation group (Experiments 2 and 3), write-a-focused-explanation group (Experiment 2), and rewrite-an-explanation group (Experiment 3) performed significantly better on a delayed posttest than the no-activity group, but the groups did not differ significantly on an immediate posttest (Experiment 1). These results are consistent with generative learning theory and help identify generative learning strategies that improve online multimedia learning, thereby priming active learning with passive media.

The purpose of this study was to examine the role of vocabulary in writing across three genres. Fifth graders ( N  = 105) wrote three compositions: story, persuasive, and informative. Each composition revolved around the topic of outer space to control for background knowledge. Written compositions were scored for holistic writing quality and several different vocabulary constructs: diversity, maturity, elaboration, academic words, content words, and register. The results indicated that students vary their vocabulary usage by genre. Story text had higher diversity than informative text as well as higher maturity as compared to persuasive text. Persuasive text contained higher diversity than informative text, and higher register than both of the other genres. Informative text included more content words and elaboration than the other text types as well as more maturity than persuasive text. Additionally, multiple regression and commonality analysis indicated that the vocabulary constructs related to writing quality differed by genre. For story text, vocabulary diversity was a unique predictor, while for persuasive text, content words and register were unique predictors. Finally, for informative text content words was the strongest unique predictor explaining almost all of the total variance in the five factor model, although maturity was also a unique predictor.

Converging evidence indicates that argumentative thinking and writing are promoted by peer discourse. Here it is proposed that collaborative writing can serve as a bridge from peer discourse to individual argumentative writing. Three groups of sixth graders participated in a study that tested this hypothesis. Two of the groups took part in a month-long intervention that emphasized engagement and practice in dialogic argumentation. These two groups differed only in addition of a joint writing activity in one group. The third group served as a non-intervention control. Final individual essays showed superior performance by the joint writing group. Essays of the superior group more frequently included evidence-based arguments. They also more often integrated belief-incongruent statements with belief-congruent ones. Group differences transferred in several respects to essays on a new topic. Results support the claim that engagement in collaborative writing offers a promising path in developing argumentative writing.

Twenty-eight Albanian-Greek bilingual children with Developmental Language Disorder and 28 children with Autism Spectrum Disorder but no language impairment, along with 28 typically-developing, age-, Performance IQ- and socioeconomic status-matched bilingual children were asked to produce two expository texts which were coded for spelling (phonological, grammatical, orthographic) errors, stress and punctuation use. The children’s expressive vocabulary, current language use and home language history were also measured. The results show that the bilingual children with Developmental Language Disorder were particularly vulnerable to spelling errors, while their bilingual peers with Autism Spectrum Disorder were rather challenged by stress and punctuation. The evidence speaks in favor of distinct patterns of writing impairment across the bilingual children with Developmental Language Disorder and Autism Spectrum Disorder.