SIG Writing Conference 2026 – Poster Presentation

AI and I: A rhizomatic analysis of writing processes with AI tools

Presenting author: Silverdal, Sara , Umeå University, Sweden
Co-author: Hermansson, Carina , Stockholm University, Sweden
Chair: Grabowski, Joachim , Leibniz University, Germany
Keywords: creative writing;education;Generative AI;writing processes
Domain: Teaching and Teacher Education; See Session Schedule

Abstract

AI and I: A rhizomatic analysis of writing processes with AI toolsSara Silverdal, Umeå University and Carina Hermansson, Stockholm UniversityAs writing practices continually co-evolve with societal and technological change, the emergence of generative AI poses new challenges and opportunities for schools and students. This paper investigates how relationships between student writers and AI technologies are enacted during the writing process, and how these relationships reshape notions of authorship, agency, and textual production. Drawing on a socio-material framework and specifically employing a rhizomatic analytic approach (Mac Lure, 2013; Alvermann 2000), the study maps the assemblages that emerge when upper-secondary students in Sweden compose short stories with access to AI tools.The empirical material consists of 24 filmed writing sessions capturing students’ screens, facial expressions, and part of their intra-actions in the room. In addition, semi-structured interviews were conducted with six students - one group interview with four participants and two individual interviews. The paper focuses in depth on three exemplifying student cases to trace divergent pathways of becoming-with AI during writing.Initial findings reveal markedly different orientations toward AI: one student delegates much of the writing to the AI; another engages in iterative, reciprocal intra-actions with AI; and a third takes a critical stance refusing to use AI at all. Across these cases, authorship emerges as fluid and negotiable, shaped by the dynamic entanglements between students, tools, and texts. The analysis also highlights how critical thinking and reading of the AI generated products appears as a valuable asset to be able to work with these tools and interpret their responses.The study contributes to writing research by providing an empirically grounded account of how generative AI reshapes writing processes and writer identities. For pedagogy, the findings highlight the need to equip both teachers and students with critical, transparent, and equitable practices for working with AI tools. Such preparation is essential to ensure that AI becomes a resource for inclusive learning rather than a source of stratification in students’ writing development. Keywords:Writing process, creative writing, generative AI, upper secondary education

Assessing Digital Multimodal Composing in L2 Writing: A Scoping Review

Presenting author: Yu, Nan , Beijing Normal University, China
Co-author: Lin, Dunlai , Beijing Normal University, China
Chair: Fürstenberg, Maurice , Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU), Germany
Keywords: assessment;evaluation and assessment of writing competence;multimodality;writing in a foreign or second language
Domain: Assessment and Evaluation; See Session Schedule

Abstract

AbstractThe continuous advancement of educational technologies has made digital multimodal composing (DMC) a burgeoning area of research in L2 writing. DMC refers to the design of a digital genre with the integration of multiple modes, such as text, image, sound, and gesture (Kessler, 2024). Instead of the traditional view of writing as monomodal written texts, DMC highlights the semiotic richness and technological affordance of contemporary writing practices. Despite growing pedagogical interest and positive evidence from L2 classrooms, appropriately assessing DMC products and composing processes remains a major challenge for writing teachers and researchers.While empirical and synthesis studies on DMC have proliferated within second language acquisition, the overall research landscape of DMC assessment remains underexplored. As a research synthesis approach, a scoping review can outline the status quo of an emergent topic and identify potential gaps for future research (Chong, 2025). Therefore, adopting the scoping review method and following the PRISMA guidelines, this paper selects and analyzes 30 research articles from 2005 to 2024 to map theoretical foundations, methodological approaches, and thematic trends in current DMC assessment research.Theoretically, current research mainly draws on three theories: systemic functional linguistics, multimodality theory, and multiliteracies theory. Methodologically, existing studies primarily employ the etic approach to explore key dimensions of DMC competence, as well as the data-driven approach to develop analytic rubrics for DMC products. Thematically, current scholarship focuses on construct definition and operationalization, teacher feedback literacy, and assessment tool development.Based on the identified limitations and gaps, corresponding directions for future research are put forward. This review contributes to a more comprehensive understanding of DMC assessment by synthesizing existing studies and offering practical implications for writing pedagogy and assessment.ReferencesChong, S. W. (2025). Synthesis Methods and Reporting Tool (SMART) for research syntheses in applied linguistics. Research Synthesis in Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1-22.Kessler, M. (2024). Digital multimodal composing: Connecting theory, research and practice in second language acquisition. Multilingual Matters.

Development and standardisation of a writing fluency test for grades 2 to 4

Presenting author: Linnemann, Markus , University of Koblenz, Germany
Presenting author: Stephany, Sabine , Universität zu Köln, Germany
Co-author: Springstein, Sander , Universität zu Köln, Germany
Co-author: Griepentrog, Anne , Mercator-Institute (Universität zu Köln), Germany
Co-author: Koch, Alina Marlene , Universität zu Köln, Germany
Co-author: Vogt, Birgit , University of Koblenz, Germany
Chair: Fürstenberg, Maurice , Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU), Germany
Keywords: evaluation and assessment of writing competence;fluency;handwriting;writing at school
Domain: Assessment and Evaluation; See Session Schedule

Abstract

An important prerequisite for developing writing competence is mastering lower-level skills, particularly writing fluency. Writing fluency comprises the automatized ability to produce legible letters, correct words, and grammatically correct sentences (transcription fluency) and locally coherent text (text generation fluency) at a reasonable pace with sustained attention (Linnemann et al. 2022). If these skills are not yet automatized, there are not enough cognitive resources available for higher order processes, such as planning the text (McCutchen 1996). Therefore, influent writing has a negative impact on text quality. Since writing fluency is not sufficiently mastered by all students in primary and secondary education, structured and targeted promotion is particularly necessary in primary school. Such promotion and the identification of children at risk require evidence-based, standardised diagnostics. However, there is currently no standardised instrument for measuring writing fluency in German-speaking countries. Teachers are therefore largely reliant on observation.Therefore, a writing fluency test was developed that includes the sub-skills of transcription fluency and text generation fluency. The test consists of four subtasks (alphabet task, word production, sentence production, text writing about a picture story). All tasks are performed against the clock. The test measures letters and words per minute and sentences per three minutes. Item analysis of 160 subjects revealed the following reliability statistics: alphabet task ICC=.98; word production=.88; split half=.98; sentence production=.75; split half=.84. The validity was confirmed in a structural equation model (Linnemann et al. 2022). Furthermore, it was demonstrated that the resulting writing fluency dimensions correlate with construct-related variables, such as text quality (r=.40) or reading fluency (r=.40). In an ongoing study, which will complete data collection in January, the test is being standardised for primary schools with 2500 students. The poster provides insights into the theoretical background, the test tasks, and the results of the standardisation study, including cut off points for students at risk, considering variables such as multilingualism, learning disabilities and dyslexia. Linnemann, M. et al. (2022). The dimensionality of writing and reading fluency and its impact on and comprehension and composition. JoWR, 14(2), 185–227. McCutchen, D. (1996). A capacity theory of writing: Working memory in composition. Educational Psychology Review, 8, 299–325.

Do Complexity, Accuracy, and Fluency Compete? Within-Person Evidence From CBM Writing

Presenting author: Winkes, Julia , University of Fribourg, Switzerland
Co-author: Schaller, Pascale , PHBern, University of Teacher Education, Switzerland
Chair: Fürstenberg, Maurice , Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU), Germany
Keywords: developmental aspects of writing ability;evaluation and assessment of writing competence;fluency;writing processes
Domain: Assessment and Evaluation; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Understanding how different dimensions of writing performance interact is essential for modelling developing writers’ abilities. Within Curriculum-Based Measurement of Writing (CBM-W), the Complexity–Accuracy–Fluency (CAF) framework provides a multidimensional perspective on text production (Wagner et al., 2019). Building on limited-capacity views of attention, it has been argued that attention is a finite resource and that the three dimensions of CAF may compete for these resources during composition (Housen & Kuiken, 2009). Consequently, writers may allocate attention to one dimension (e.g., accuracy) at the expense of others (e.g., fluency or complexity), resulting in trade-offs in performance rather than balanced expression of all dimensions within a given writing episode (Smith et al., 2023). Such trade-offs may help explain the substantial intraindividual performance fluctuations observed across short, closely spaced writing tasks. The present study addresses this hypothesis by analyzing the dynamic interplay among the three CAF dimensions in children’s CBM-writing performance.Data have been collected from students in Grade 3 and Grade 6 (N =296), who each produced five 5-minute CBM writing probes within one week. Fluency was operationalised as Total Words Written (TWW), Accuracy as the percentage of Correct Word Sequences (%CWS), and Complexity as orthographic complexity, reflecting the occurrence of advanced orthographic patterns in the child’s intended text. Because each child produced several texts, observations are nested within students (Level 1: texts; Level 2: student).The planned analyses involve a multivariate multilevel path model, enabling the investigation of within-person associations among the CAF dimensions and potential variability in these relationships across students and grade levels. Central to this analysis is the question of whether changes in one dimension systematically relate to changes in the others, thereby indicating trade-offs in writers’ allocation of cognitive and linguistic resources.ReferencesHousen, A., & Kuiken, F. (2009). Complexity, Accuracy, and Fluency in Second Language Acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 461–473. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp048Smith, A. R., Allen, A. A., & Alley, J. (2023). A literature synthesis of curriculum‐based measurement in writing for English learners. Psychology in the Schools, Article pits.23121. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.23121 Wagner, K., Smith, A., Allen, A. A., McMaster, K. L., Poch, A., & Lembke, E. S. (2019). Exploration of New Complexity Metrics for Curriculum-Based Measures of Writing. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 44(4), 256–266. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534508418773448

Effects of oral language instruction on children's writing

Presenting author: Díaz-Tejedor, Rubén , University of León, Spain, Spain
Co-author: Arias-Gundín, Olga , University of León, Spain
Chair: Whitehouse, Marlies , ZHAW Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Switzerland
Keywords: L1;learning to write;meta-analysis;written language competence
Domain: Developmental Aspects of Instruction; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Writing and reading, together with mathematical competence, are fundamental pillars for students’ overall development. Despite the importance of writing, early instruction in it often focuses primarily on mechanical skills, delaying the introduction of more complex or abstract content. In response to this, contemporary models of writing such as DIEW (Kim & Schatschneider, 2017) propose both direct and indirect contributors to writing, including oral language at the discourse level.Bearing that in mind, the objective of the present study is to analyze the effect of interventions focused on developing oral skills on early writing performance in preschool and primary education students.The study consisted of a meta-analysis of instructional studies addressing oral language and its impact on early writing competence. The process was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines throughout. Studies published between 2015 and 2025 were included if they were available in full text, in English or Spanish, and analyzed instructional programs targeting oral language and early writing. Studies were excluded involving students from fourth grade or above, clinical or special education samples, or foreign language contexts.The meta-analysis included 16 studies covering a total of 11,823 participants. The combined correlation between oral skills and early writing competence was moderate and significant (r = .45, 95% CI [.33, .55], Z = 7.53, p < .001), although heterogeneity was high (I² = 91.54%).The results provide evidence of a moderate, positive relationship between oral language instruction and writing competence, both in lower-level and higher-level writing skills. Subgroup analysis showed stronger effects in primary education than in preschool, suggesting that oral language interventions can enhance writing performance as learning progresses, thereby opening up paths for tiered instructional strategies.This work was co-financed by the Department of Education of CyL and the European Social Fund Plus under the framework of the Predoctoral PR 2023 Call, a grant awarded to the first author. This work was created under a project (PID2021-124011NB-I00) financed by MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033 and "ERDF A way of making Europe" Kim, Y. G., & Schatschneider, C. (2017). Expanding the developmental models of writing: A direct and indirect effects model of developmental writing (DIEW). Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(1), 35–50. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000129

Emergent Literacy Development: A Socio-Constructivist Program in Preschool

Presenting author: Salvador, Liliana , ISPA - University Institute, Portugal
Co-author: Martins, Margarida Alves , ISPA-Instituto Universitário EDUNOVA.ISPA, Portugal
Co-author: Maruta, Filipa , ISPA - University Institute, Portugal
Co-author: Laranjeira, Ricardo , ISPA - University Institute, Portugal
Chair: Whitehouse, Marlies , ZHAW Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Switzerland
Keywords: collaborative writing;experimental approaches;intervention study;learning to write
Domain: Learning and Social Interaction; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Emergent literacy refers to the foundational skills, knowledge, and behaviours that precede formal reading and writing instruction. It encompasses the natural development of literacy as children interact with their environment. These early literacy skills, as letter knowledge, phonological awareness invented spelling and early reading are crucial for successful reading and writing development, influencing long-term academic outcomes. The socio-constructive approach to literacy development considers that children build knowledge through meaningful interactions with peers and educators which role is to provide guidance, scaffolding and minimal intervention to support children’s discoveries. In this context our aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of a socio-constructivist emergent literacy programme in preschool designated to develop key literacy skills. Four classes from 2 schools in the Lisbon area attended by 88 5-year-olds participated in this study. The emergent literacy program was developed with 49 children attending two of these classes (experimental group). In the other 2 classes comprising 39 children, traditional literacy activities were developed (control group). In both classes the activities were developed by the educators during their classes. Children’s phonological awareness, letter knowledge, reading and spelling were assessed at the beginning and end of the school year. The emergent literacy program comprised 12 sessions, each beginning with contextualized activities (e.g., storytelling, singing a song, watching a short film) that provided a framework for subsequent learning. This was followed by activities addressing several emergent literacy skills (e.g., phonological awareness, letter knowledge, vocabulary, early interaction with print, invented spelling). All sessions began with a large group activity, followed by a small group activity, and finished with an individual activity. The control group activities consisted, mainly, of traditional tasks such as rhyming, singing songs, storytelling, and copying letters and words, in groups or individually, with low levels of interaction between the children. The study results demonstrated statistically significant differences between the groups, with the experimental group showing substantial improvements in letter knowledge, phonological awareness, spelling, and reading compared to the control group. These findings suggest that emergent literacy programs incorporating socio-constructivist and naturalistic practices can be highly effective in developing fundamental skills in preschool children.

From fluency to quality: language proficiency and task genre in L2 process-product relations

Presenting author: Haake, Lisa , Institute of Educational Science, University of Münster, Germany
Chair: Fürstenberg, Maurice , Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU), Germany
Keywords: fluency;keystroke logging;proficiency;writing in a foreign or second language
Domain: Cognitive Science; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Writing fluency in a second language (L2) is a crucial competence in both educational and professional contexts. Yet, how language proficiency and task complexity influence the relationship between writing processes and products remains to be fully elucidated. Writing fluency describes the skill of rapidly and seamlessly converting conceptual ideas into written language, with minimal hesitation or interruption. Fluent writing skills free up cognitive resources, which can then be allocated to other attention-binding tasks within the writing process, a prerequisite for composing a high-quality text. However, disfluency can also enhance text quality, as pauses and revisions may be used to refine its language, structure, and content.Existing evidence suggests that writers’ ability to produce text fluently depends on both their language proficiency and the cognitive demands of the writing task. To examine these effects, 60 students composed two texts – counterbalanced a description and an argumentation – both in English as their L2, while their writing process was recorded via keystroke logging. Participants also completed a cloze test to assess L2 proficiency and a copy task to control for typing skills. The log files were analyzed for various fluency parameters, including production rates, bursts, pauses, and revisions. The resulting texts were evaluated for overall quality, linguistic complexity, and accuracy.Multiple regression analyses revealed that writing fluency, linguistic complexity, and accuracy each significantly predicted text quality across both genres, and writing was overall more fluent in the argumentation than in the description. Moderation analyses partly supported the initial hypotheses: only among highly proficient writers did greater fluency correspond to greater lexical complexity in the argumentation. Less experienced writers had to slow down and interrupt their writing more frequently to express themselves in a lexically complex manner. In all other aspects of writing performance, higher fluency was consistently associated with better outcomes, regardless of task genre or proficiency level.Overall, the findings demonstrate that writing fluency is a key indicator of L2 writing competence, contributing to better performance across proficiency levels and task types. These results highlight the need to afford greater attention to fluency in both L2 writing research and pedagogy.

Genre awareness in Dutch L1 writing education

Presenting author: van Gulik, Jan , University Utrecht, Netherlands
Co-author: Stukker, Ninke , Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, Netherlands
Co-author: Bouwer, Renske , Utrecht University, Netherlands
Co-author: Evers-Vermeul, Jacqueline , Utrecht University, Netherlands
Co-author: Mantingh, Erwin , Utrecht University, Netherlands
Chair: Grabowski, Joachim , Leibniz University, Germany
Keywords: acquisition;education;L1;text genre
Domain: Assessment and Evaluation; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Genre awareness in Dutch L1 writing educationJan van Gulik, Renske Bouwer, Jacqueline Evers-Vermeul, Erwin Mantingh & Ninke StukkerContemporary approaches to genre education often put an emphasis on genre-specific writing schemes, lists of rules that texts from a specific genre adhere to (Devitt, 2004; Johns, 2008). However, such schemes suggest to students that there is only one way to write a text. Another limitation of implementing genre education through prescriptive schemes is that students only learn to write in a limited number of genres.An alternative approach is to invest in a more general genre awareness. This provides students with a metalanguage for interpreting unfamiliar genres and variations of familiar genres (Devitt, 2004; Tardy et al., 2020). However, we know little about the extent to which genre awareness is already addressed in the current Dutch L1 curriculum. The new core objectives for Dutch, for example, seem to require more genre knowledge than before. Therefore, we examine how these core objectives and Dutch course materials for pre-vocational secondary education address genres. In this material analysis, we examined for each language domain (reading, speaking, and writing):• which terms are used for genres (e.g., text forms and text types)• which specific example genres (e.g., reviews) are mentioned• which genre characteristics (e.g., content) are addressed.Results show that both materials contain useful ingredients for fostering students’ genre awareness, but that a more integrative approach is needed, as different aspects of genre theory are scattered across language domains. In the writing domain, connections between the communicative purpose and conventions of genres are addressed. However, a discussion of the communicative context of genres (e.g. relationship between language users) remains underexposed. Furthermore, the core objectives address both common, popular genres and macro-genres (such as persuasive texts), while course materials focus on the latter in the writing domain.We discuss implications for improving course materials, and for successful implementation of genre pedagogy in the Dutch context.BibliographyDevitt, A. (2004). Writing Genres. Southern Illinois University Press.Johns, A. (2008). Genre awareness for the novice academic student: An ongoing quest. Language Teaching, 41(2), 235-252.Tardy, C. et al. (2020). Teaching and researching genre knowledge. Written Communication, 37(3), 287-321.

How generative AI reshapes students' writing practices at a French university writing center

Presenting author: Miftah, Hamza , Université Clermont Auvergne, France
Chair: Whitehouse, Marlies , ZHAW Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Switzerland
Keywords: academic writing;Generative AI;writing processes;writing tools and writing technology
Domain: Higher Education; See Session Schedule

Abstract

This paper examines how academic writing in higher education is transformed when writing is learned, regulated, and evaluated in interaction with generative artificial intelligence (GAI) tools. Focusing on master’s students’ learning of academic writing at a French university writing center, the study considers academic writing as an activity system (Engeström, 2014) and as a situated literacy practice (Lea & Street, 1998), in a context where students are typically confronted with the task of writing a master’s thesis without prior instruction in academic writing.From an activity theory standpoint, academic writing is seen as a goal-directed activity in which subjects, tools, and communities interact over time (Russell, 1997). From an academic literacies perspective, what is considered a valued text is embedded in broader relations of position and identity (Lillis & Tuck, 2016). This double lens allows us to examine not only what students do with GAI, but also how it positions them within communities of practice. The data combine a survey on rhetorical awareness, self-regulation, and GAI-related practices with semi-structured interviews conducted with master’s students attending the writing center. This work is drawn from an ongoing doctoral project on students’ learning of academic writing. Expected findings include differentiated profiles of learners according to how they mobilize GAI, genre knowledge and self-regulatory strategies to align their texts with perceived expectations. These profiles are expected to support the view that academic writing increasingly involves the use of GAI tools, not simply to offload writing tasks, but to mediate academic genres for novice writers whose disciplinary identities are still under construction, by making certain norms and expectations more explicit to them.This paper argues that studying writing through the lens of activity theory and academic literacies offers an understanding of GAI as a structuring component in the broader system of writing, as it reconfigures access to norms, resources, and legitimate participation in academic communities (Lave & Wenger, 1991). The needs revealed by students’ use of GAI tools offer research-informed directions for writing support that focuses on agency and rhetorical awareness in the use of tools, rather than on the technical regulation of GAI use.

Impact of home literacy practices on elementary students’ writing performance and motivation

Presenting author: Arrimada, María , University of León, Spain
Co-author: Robledo, Patricia , University of León, Spain
Co-author: Algorri, Laura , University of León, Spain
Co-author: Díaz-Burgos, Alberto , University of León, Spain, Spain
Co-author: Algorri Diez, Laura , University of León, Spain
Chair: Whitehouse, Marlies , ZHAW Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Switzerland
Keywords: developmental aspects of writing ability;learning to write;motivational and emotional factors in writing;writing processes
Domain: Learning and Social Interaction; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Current developmental models of writing assume a sociocultural perspective where the mastery of writing is explained by a set of internal and external processes (Graham, 2018). Writing acquisition is, therefore, the result of continuous formal and informal interactions between the writer and the context. Among these external and informal learning environments, families become a keystone. Literature confirms the relationship between home literacy practices, students’ transcription skills (Guo et al., 2021) and motivation towards writing (Sparks & Reese, 2013). Research, however, has been conducted almost exclusively in preschool and very early elementary stages and it is not extended to high-level cognitive and motivational processes involved in writing. This study analyses the impact of home literacy practices and writing supports in both writing performance and motivation towards writing across elementary grades. 1464 Spanish students from 1st to 6th grade distributed in 9 schools participated in the study. Their families completed the Home Writing Practices and Support Questionnaire, which explores types of home writing practices (formal vs. informal) and kinds of support (content, motivational, procedural). Students’ handwriting and spelling skills were assessed respectively through sentence-copy and spelling-to-dictation tasks. Participants wrote a narrative to assess their planning and composing skills. A mandatory revision exercise was completed after the composition task. The students also completed three questionnaires on motivation, attitudes towards writing and writing self-efficacy. Assessments were delivered by researchers over two sessions. Data is under analysis and results will be presented and discussed at the conference. Our findings might contribute to reshape sociocognitive conceptions of writing development. This work is part of a project funded by the Ministry of Science and Innovation and the European Union (ref. PID2021-124011NB-I00).Graham, S. (2018). A Revised Writer(s)-Within-Community Model of Writing. Educational Psychologist, 53(4), 258–279. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2018.1481406Guo, Y., Puranik, C., Dinnesen, M. S., & Hall, A. H. (2021). Exploring kindergarten teachers’ classroom practices and beliefs in writing. Reading and Writing, 35(2), 457–478. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-021-10193-ySparks, A., & Reese, E. (2013). From reminiscing to reading: Home contributions to children’s developing language and literacy in low-income families. First Language, 33(1), 89-109. https://doi.org/10.1177/014272371143358

In search of Proust’s creative writing process : genetics, textometrics and cognitive psychology

Presenting author: Darrak, Zahra Ed , Aix-Marseille University, France
Co-author: Bouzereau, Camille , Université côte d'Azur, France
Chair: Whitehouse, Marlies , ZHAW Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Switzerland
Keywords: creative writing;text analysis;writing process data collections;writing processes
Domain: -; See Session Schedule

Abstract

This study is part of the ANR Cré@Lame project, which is developing several tools adapted to the recording, dynamic visual reproduction and analysis of the writing and creativity processes observed in the drafts of heritage writers and contemporary writers (Quaranta et al. 2023). Methodologically, the research project combines data from textual genetics (Quaranta, 2004) with quantitative textual data processing developed in textometrics on literary texts (Brunet, 1982). The poster will present our corpus composed of the different manuscript versions of the incipit of the Recherche (Lavault 2013), with the aim of describing, from a genetic and stylistic point of view, the construction of the incipit of the Recherche and considering their contributions to psycholinguistics and the psychology of creativity. The combination of genetic and textometric studies will allow for a detailed examination of the macrostructural and microstructural changes in the successive rewritings of the incipit.ReferencesBrunet E. (1982). Le style de Proust dans la Recherche du temps perdu. Étude quantitative. VII International Symposium of the Association for Literacy and Linguistic Computing, p. 51-76.Lavault M. (2013) Du côté de l’incipit de la Recherche : la genèse de la fiction selon Proust. Genesis (Manuscrits-Recherche-Invention), 36, 91-104.Bonnardel, N. (2012). Créativité et conception. Approches cognitives et ergonomiques, De Boeck.Quaranta J-M. (2004). Proust “débutant” : la dynamique de l'écriture dans les premiers textes. Bulletin d'informations proustiennes, 34, 73-88.Quaranta, J.-M., Barbier, M-L, & Butzek, A.-M. (2023). écriture créative et formation, In N. Bonnardel, F. Girandola, E. Bonetto & T. Lubart (Eds.). La Créativité en Situations : Théories et applications (pp. 285-294). Paris : Dunod.Wallas, G. (1926). The Art of Thought. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Company.

Institutional policies on generative AI in BA thesis writing: Evidence from Romanian universities

Presenting author: Baniceru, Ana Cristina , West University of Timisoara, Romania
Presenting author: Doroholschi, Claudia Ioana , West University of Timisoara, Romania, Romania
Co-author: Dinca, Andreea , West University of Timisoara, Romania
Co-author: Rogobete, Roxana , West University of Timisoara, Romania
Co-author: Chitez, Madalina , West University of Timisoara, Romania
Chair: Grabowski, Joachim , Leibniz University, Germany
Keywords: academic writing;education;Generative AI;pedagogy and instruction
Domain: Learning and Instructional Technology; See Session Schedule

Abstract

LLMs have changed educational practices in universities across the world. This impact might be even greater in the case of bachelor theses, often written by less experienced students who might need more support with writing and might resort to LLMs to provide it. Universities have responded by creating policy frameworks that set the limits of permitted and disallowed uses of generative AI (e.g., Jin et al., 2025). Not all institutions, however, have been equally quick to respond to these challenges. In Romania, many universities have preferred to wait for models of action to become available from leading international institutions or official boards and have not yet articulated clear AI-related policies, which often leaves students and supervisors without clear guidance about how AI may be used in bachelor theses.In the present study, we analyse data from questionnaires and interviews, as well as publicly available policy documents from universities in the country to answer the following questions: Do Romanian higher education institutions have AI-related policies, and when were they implemented? Do these policies include specific provisions regarding Bachelor theses? Are students and supervisors aware of the existence of such policies, and do they integrate them in their work? Our findings show that, to date, not many Romanian universities have explicit policies regarding the use of AI. When they do exist, these often include only limited sections dedicated to the use of AI and few offer practical guidance on how to use AI in an ethical manner. By contrast, respondents to the interviews and questionnaires emphasize the need for institutional policies and for a consistent approach to the use of AI tools. Finally, we problematize this tension between the expressed needs of the academic communities and what the educational system currently provides, and make recommendations for the development of practical, discipline-sensitive guidance to support students’responsible use of AI in university contexts.Jin, Y., Yan, L., Echeverria, V., Gašević, D., & Martinez-Maldonado, R. (2025). Generative AI in higher education: A global perspective of institutional adoption policies and guidelines. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100348

Making Writing Processes Visible: Sentence-Level Visualizations of Keystroke Logging Data

Presenting author: Mahlow, Cerstin , ZHAW Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Switzerland
Chair: Whitehouse, Marlies , ZHAW Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Switzerland
Keywords: data visualisation;keystroke logging data processing and analysis;research methodology;writing processes
Domain: -; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Understanding how texts are produced is crucial for developing theoretical models, evaluating writing strategies, and enhancing practical applications in writing instruction. Current keystroke logging analysis (e.g., THEtool https://github.com/mulasik/wta, analyses integrated in Inputlog https://www.inputlog.net) provides aggregated information to be interpreted by researchers, but only rudimentary visualization. These visualizations are mostly aimed at researchers, not at writers themselves. Visualizations as static graphics pose a challenge to cover highly dynamic processes as writing. We address this gap by designing and implementing novel visualizations that effectively display writing actions on sentence level by using output from THEtool. Our work is situated at the intersection of writing research and visual analytics, using raw keystroke logging data in XML-format processed by THEtool as input. The primary challenge is the meaningful integration of the static writing product and the temporal process using the notion of “version” by Mahlow (2015) into a single, comprehensive representation understandable by writers and researchers, being both aesthetically attractive and suitable for research purposes (e.g., for hypothesis building).We designed 8 new visualization models and implementated them as custom JavaScript visualizations based on syntactically processed keystroke logging data. The data is aggregated into sentence histories, classifying transformations (e.g., append, insert, delete, replace) to map actions to the sentences they affect. We demonstrate the feasibility with a pilot study of university students who wrote under identical conditions. The developed visualizations include a new model for product-process combination graphs and detailed sentence histories. (Mahlow 2015)The results reveal diverse and significantly non-linear writing strategies among participants. The novel visualizations successfully integrate the process and product dimensions in a meaningful way.These individualized process visualizations hold significant potential for bridging empirical research with aesthetically appealing display of processes to writers for reflection on their own writing strategies and challenges as well as allowing researchers to formulate research hypotheses. C. Mahlow (2015). A Definition of "Version" for Text Production Data and Natural Language Document Drafts. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on (Document) Changes: Modeling, Detection, Storage and Visualization ACM, New York, pp. 27-32. doi:10.1145/2881631.2881638C. Mahlow (2025). Die meisten schreiben das Ende zuerst. Oder nicht? Schreibprozesse sichtbar machen. 24 pages. doi:10.5281/ZENODO.15667692

Negotiating Rhetorical Traditions in Post-Communist Romania: A Collaborative Autoethnography

Presenting author: Baniceru, Ana Cristina , West University of Timisoara, Romania
Presenting author: Doroholschi, Claudia Ioana , West University of Timisoara, Romania, Romania
Presenting author: Ene, Estela , Indiana University, United States
Co-author: Dinca, Andreea , West University of Timisoara, Romania
Co-author: Chitez, Madalina , West University of Timisoara, Romania
Chair: Grabowski, Joachim , Leibniz University, Germany
Keywords: academic writing;education;EFL and ESL writing;social and cultural aspects of writing
Domain: Higher Education; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Teaching and researching writing are situated within specific socio-economical contexts, and pedagogical decisions made by writing teachers are embedded both in diverse rhetorical traditions and broader historical, ideological and institutional structures (Street, 1995). Teachers’ own literacy trajectories move across institutional, discoursal and power structures, and, like their students, teachers have developed as writers by using a varied repertoire of strategies and discourses to negotiate different contexts and identities. In this study, we use collaborative autoethnography to investigate the literacy trajectories of five writing teacher-researchers. Collaborative autoethnography brings researchers together to generate, interpret, and analyze autoethnographic data (Chang et al., 2004) and thus helps access the relationship between individual experience and the broader socio-historical contexts in more depth. The participants are five Romanian-born academics with very different professional trajectories who have all studied in Romania but then worked and researched across different contexts. We worked collaboratively to generate autoethnographic data, reflecting on the most important turning points in our evolution as academic writers, researchers and teachers, and on our understanding of our positions as writing teachers and researchers within our institutions, but also within the broader international context. We next analysed the autoethnographic data, first individually and then in collective meetings, identifying commonalities and contrasts across our trajectories and identifying common themes. The themes identified speak to how we see ourselves as Romanian academics researching and teaching English in an Anglo-Centric environment, how we have adapted, adopted or transcended the multiple rhetorical traditions we have been exposed to, and how the way we negotiated these tensions shapes our teaching. Finally, we consider the broader implications of these examples of researcher-teachers’ trajectories and their impact on pedagogical practice. Chang, H., Ngunjiri, F. W., & Hernandez, K.-A. C. (2016). Collaborative autoethnography. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315432137Street, B. V. (1995). Social literacies: Critical approaches to literacy in development, ethnography and education (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315844282

Perspective taking and writing motivation on argumentative writing quality

Presenting author: Hagelund, Silje , University of Oslo, Norway
Co-author: Torkildsen, Janne von Koss , University of Oslo, Norway
Co-author: Lervåg, Arne , University of Oslo, Norway
Chair: Fürstenberg, Maurice , Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU), Germany
Keywords: evaluation and assessment of writing competence;motivational and emotional factors in writing;writing at school;writing skills
Domain: Motivational, Social and Affective Processes; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Purpose: Argumentative writing requires writers to generate linguistically complex text while simultaneously coordinating claims and reasons to convince their audience. This coordination may depend not only on foundational reading and writing skills but also on socio-cognitive factors such as perspective-taking and writing motivation. This study examined whether writing motivation and perspective-taking predict 7th‑grade argumentative writing quality after accounting for foundational language skills.Method: Participants were 200 7th-grade students participating in a longitudinal study in Norway. Measures included an argumentative writing task, self-reported perspective-taking (a subscale of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index), writing motivation (five subscales), listening comprehension (NARA-II), vocabulary (WPPSI), reading comprehension (NARA-II), word decoding (TOWRE), an adapted spelling test (Staveprøven), and a short transcription task. Argumentative texts were scored on dimensions of writing quality, namely writing conventions (WC), language complexity (LC), and argumentative skills and audience awareness (AAW). Structural equation modeling with latent variables was used to analyze the data. Results: Perspective-taking significantly predicted AAW when accounting for reading- and writing-related skills, while writing motivation showed a marginally significant association (p = 0.050). However, the high correlation between perspective-taking and writing motivation might indicate collinearity, which may limit estimation of each predictor’s unique contribution to argumentative skills and audience awareness in argumentative writing. In addition, reading comprehension significantly predicted LC and AAW and mediated the effects of oral language on these writing outcomes. Word decoding was not a significant predictor in the full model after controlling for spelling. Spelling was positively associated with WC and LC, while transcription fluency was not a significant predictor in the model. Conclusion: These findings highlight the roles of student’s capacity for perspective-taking and writing motivation in students’ ability to consider an audience when writing, beyond the influence of reading- and writing-related skills. At the same time, our results underscore the central role of reading skills and spelling as a foundation for argumentative writing quality.

The Emergence of Orthographic Revision in Early Writing

Presenting author: Lopez, Paula , University of León, Spain
Presenting author: Álvarez-Moreno, Carmen , Universidad de Leon, Spain
Co-author: Peña, Lorena , Universidad de Leon, Spain
Co-author: Fernández, Sandra , Universidad de Leon, Spain
Co-author: Arias-Gundín, Olga , University of León, Spain
Chair: Whitehouse, Marlies , ZHAW Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Switzerland
Keywords: developmental aspects of writing ability;errors and error correction;L1;writing processes
Domain: Assessment and Evaluation; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Research on writing revision has traditionally focused on older students, while studies examining revision processes in the early years of primary education remain scarce. During these initial stages, revision is typically limited and mainly focused on orthographic aspects, which receive strong instructional emphasis and are more accessible than higher-level textual features. From this perspective, orthography provides a particularly informative domain for analysing early revision processes, as it lies at the intersection of transcription skills and emerging metacognitive control. Accordingly, the present study examines how orthographic revision emerges and develops from Grade 1 to 3.Participants were 247 Spanish primary school students (Grade 1: n = 75; Grade 2: n = 89; Grade 3: n = 83). All students completed the same two-session narrative writing task following an identical procedure across grades. In Session 1, students produced an initial narrative text. In Session 2, one week later, they revised their text in two phases: explicit detection of orthographic errors and subsequent rewriting. Orthographic revision was analysed using a fine-grained coding scheme distinguishing letter-level errors (incorrect use of upper- and lower-case letters, omission or addition of letters), rule-based errors (accentuation and violations of orthographic rules), and word-level errors (incorrect word segmentation). Measures captured the number and type of errors, as well as the quantity and accuracy of error detection and revision.Although analyses are still ongoing, preliminary findings indicate clear developmental trends. From Grade 1 to 3, letter-level and word-segmentation errors decrease, whereas rule-based errors increase, possibly reflecting growing linguistic complexity. Error detection remains limited overall but improves with grade level. Importantly, when errors are detected, both detection and correction tend to be accurate, even in the earliest grades. These findings suggest that early constraints on revision are more strongly related to limitations in revision than to orthographic knowledge itself, highlighting the need for early instructional support targeting revision strategies. Final analyses will be completed and presented at the conference.This communication is part of the I+D+i PID2021-124011NB-I00 project funded by MCIN/ AEI/10.13039/501100011033/ and “FEDER Una manera de hacer Europa”

The importance of the imagined figure of the reader to children's writing achievement

Presenting author: Newton, Moira , University of Auckland and Papatoetoe West School, New Zealand
Chair: Whitehouse, Marlies , ZHAW Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Switzerland
Keywords: attention;cognitive processes;learning to write;writing processes
Domain: Developmental Aspects of Instruction; See Session Schedule

Abstract

This poster presents an investigation of the relationship between children’s awareness of the reader, their metapragmatic awareness (MPRA), as they write and their writing achievement. The questions asked are what is the nature of children’s MPRA and what is the relationship of MPRA to children’s writing achievement? A focus on MPRA is part of a larger mixed methods study of the relationship between children’s metalinguistic awareness (MLA) and their writing achievement. Audience awareness is known to be related to writing achievement and quality (Graham et al., 2018; Holdstock, 2024). The imagined figure of the reader is an important part of the model of the writing process in cognitive writing theory (Flower & Hayes,1981). The way MPRA shapes linguistic choices and thus influences writing achievement merits investigation. Method: the sample was a group of 31 children aged seven to eleven years from an inner city, multi-ethnic Auckland primary school. The children completed a writing test, New Zealand e asTTle: writing and a metalinguistic test, the Verbal Fluency test. These results enabled establishment of profile groups at four levels of attainment: high writing and high metalinguistic; high writing, low metalinguistic; low writing, high metalinguistic; low writing, low metalinguistic. All the children wrote a paragraph about an e asTTle prompt: “Recount an experience with extended family and friends”. They thought aloud as they wrote in a modified think aloud protocol termed a verbalisation. Immediately after writing the children completed a semi structured interview. The resulting qualitative data was transcribed and analysed by the researcher into seven categories including MPRA in which sentences or phrases referring to the category were recorded as mentions. Results showed that thinking about the reader shaped children’s metalinguistic choices. Children of all levels of achievement expressed their ability to think about their reader as they wrote. Thinking about the reader in a differentiated and detailed manner was related to writing achievement. Some children displayed more sophisticated MPRA than others, thus it seemed there was evidence that the awareness of one’s reader developed in ways that in some way related to their writing achievement.

Understanding and Assessing Effective Note-Taking with a Digital Pen in Middle School

Presenting author: Gerth, Sabrina , University College of Teacher Education Tyrol, Austria
Chair: Grabowski, Joachim , Leibniz University, Germany
Keywords: education;handwriting;pedagogy and instruction;writing skills
Domain: Teaching and Teacher Education; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Handwriting requires the interaction of language, cognition, and motor skills (Odersky, 2018). Once motor skills as a lower-level process have been acquired, additional resources become available in the areas of cognition and language (Speck-Hamdan et al., 2016). These higher-level processes are for instance reflected in the quality of handwritten notes and personal thoughts.Note-taking is an effective strategy to support learning in the classroom. Different forms of handwritten notes exist: Linear notes include outlining and the sentence method (writing one sentence for each topic). Non-linear forms of notes include tables, mind maps, Cornell notes, SQ3R (Survey, Question, Read, Recite, Review), and guided notes, in which students are provided with an external framework with headings, guiding questions, or important key terms. Not only is note-taking an important skill, but reviewing and learning with notes also correlates with test performance (Kiewra et al., 1991). Studies in secondary education revealed that writing speed correlates with the quality of notes (Graham et al., 1997). Writing instruction in primary education (legibility) is related to the length and quality of notes in advanced school careers (Berninger et al., 1997; Graham et al., 2000). Peverly et al. (2007) investigated which cognitive skills contribute to high-quality note-taking. The results show that writing fluency was the only predictor of the quality of the notes. We will present a project in one middle school class (n=25) over three years (start October 2025). The students use a digital pen during note-taking. The teachers will instruct different types of note-taking in class, while the researchers will evaluate the quality of notes, legibility and the performance correlation. The teachers involved in the project can enhance their professional skills by reflecting on their instructional methods in a cooperative team with the researchers. This leads to transparent lesson planning and didactic self-reflection. Additionally, we will annually conduct partially structured interviews with the students. The poster will present the research design and preliminary results of the first year.

What Does My Reader Need? Audience Awareness in Sixth-Graders’ Written LEGO Instructions

Presenting author: Knoph, Rebecca , University of Oslo, Norway
Co-author: Hagelund, Silje , University of Oslo, Norway
Co-author: Torkildsen, Janne von Koss , University of Oslo, Norway
Chair: Grabowski, Joachim , Leibniz University, Germany
Keywords: education;writing at school;writing skills;writing tasks
Domain: Assessment and Evaluation; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Purpose: Audience awareness is central to effective writing, requiring writers to anticipate readers’ needs and misunderstandings (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1987; Hayes, 2012). Failures to support and consider readers have contributed to catastrophic consequences, including fatal radiation explosions linked to technical instructions that failed to anticipate user interpretation (Leveson & Turner, 1993). This study examines how Norwegian sixth-grade students demonstrate audience awareness through reader supports when writing LEGO-based procedural texts for real readers (though low-stakes), and whether these demonstrations differ by writer gender.Method: Seventy sixth-grade students wrote instructions for a specific peer to build a six-piece LEGO figure using only the written instructions, ensuring genuine communication. Three researchers independently coded texts for reader supports indicating audience awareness using a deductively-developed, inductively-refined rubric with seven categories: reader connection, adaptation, emphasis, sequential markers, figurative language, goals, and action support. Patterns of reader support use were compared by author gender using frequency counts and qualitative examples.Results: Sixth-grade writers demonstrated audience awareness in procedural writing. Sequence markers were almost always present, and action support appeared in over half of essays, whereas reader-oriented supports (e.g., reader connection and goal orientation) appeared in only about one third. Girls produced substantially more reader supports than boys, with more than four times as many reader connection instances and twice as many adaptation, action support, and goal orientation instances. Discussion: Authentic, hands-on writing tasks can elicit clear demonstrations of audience awareness through reader supports, even in relatively short procedural texts (approximately 100 words). Despite the task being designed to align with boys’ LEGO-building interests and spatial reasoning strengths, girls more consistently and flexibly supported their readers. These findings suggest gender differences in how young writers conceptualize and enact audience awareness, underscoring the need for instructional approaches that explicitly support students in anticipating and responding to readers’ needs.ReferencesBereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Hayes, J. R. (2012). Modeling and remodeling writing. Written Communication, 29(3), 369–388. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088312451260Leveson, N. G., & Turner, C. S. (1993). An investigation of the Therac-25 accidents. Computer, 26(7), 18–41.https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.1993.274940

What linguistic changes occur in texts after an SRSD intervention?

Presenting author: Cutillas, Laia , Universitat de Lleida, Spain
Co-author: Mañas-Navarrete, Iban , Universitat de Barcelona, Spain
Co-author: Lamas, Elsa Liste , ZHAW Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Switzerland
Co-author: Cuberos-Vicente, Rocío , Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain
Co-author: Salas, Naymé , Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain
Chair: Fürstenberg, Maurice , Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU), Germany
Keywords: evaluation and assessment of writing competence;instructional design in writing;text analysis;writing models
Domain: Assessment and Evaluation; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Teaching children to become proficient writers is a central goal of education. However, students at all educational levels often struggle with effective expression, particularly in argumentative writing (Crowhurst, 1990). Analytical genres are at the core of school and academic experiences, yet they are one of the most protracted accomplishments in text production (Berman, 2008). In the last few decades, the focus on writing instruction has shifted toward strategies that support the writing process (Salas et al., 2023). One such approach, Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD), emphasises teaching specific strategies for different stages of the writing process (Graham & Harris, 2018). Developmental studies have identified several text characteristics, such as text-embedded lexicon (lexical diversity, lexical density, word length, adjectives) and syntactic complexity (clause length, relative pronouns, discourse markers), as indicators of development and genre accuracy. This presentation outlines findings from an intervention study that taught argumentative text production, examining whether an SRSD writing intervention focused on the planning process can induce linguistic changes in argumentative texts written in Catalan by 1,021 participants from 2nd- and 4th-grade. There were two conditions: a business-as-usual control group or an SRSD opinion-essay planning intervention experimental group. Specifically, we compare seven linguistic features of a total of 1,702 texts, 888 written before (pretest) and 814 produced after (posttest) an SRSD writing intervention, to assess its short-term effectiveness. Results show significant linguistic improvements in the experimental group, including richer lexical choices and greater syntactic complexity. In contrast, the control group’s texts show no such changes. These findings suggest that targeted instruction in writing processes can lead to improvements in students’ language use and writing practices. References Berman, R. A. (2008). The psycholinguistics of developing text construction. Journal of Child Language, 35, 735-771. Crowhurst, M. (1990). Teaching and Learning the Writing of Persuasive/Argumentative Discourse. Canadian Journal of Education, 15(4), 348-359. Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2018). An Examination of the Design Principles Underlying a Self-Regulated Strategy Development Study. Journal of Writing Research, 10(2), 137-187. Salas, N., Pascual, M., Birello, M., & Cros, A. (2023). Embedding Explicit Linguistic Instruction in an SRSD Writing Intervention. Written Communication, 40(3), 857-891.

Writing Assessment in Primary Education in Spanish-Speaking Contexts

Presenting author: Real, Sara , Universidad de Leon, Spain
Co-author: Tacuri, Héctor Loja , Universidad de Leon, Spain
Co-author: Arias-Gundín, Olga , Universidad de Leon, Spain
Co-author: Loja Tacuri, Héctor , Universidad de Leon, Spain
Co-author: Arias-Gundín, Olga , Universidad de Leon, Spain
Chair: Grabowski, Joachim , Leibniz University, Germany
Keywords: assessment;education;evaluation and assessment of writing competence;handwriting
Domain: Assessment and Evaluation; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Writing Assessment in Primary Education in Spanish-Speaking Contexts: A Systematic Review of Instruments and Tasks Writing is a core component of school literacy and a strong predictor of academic success; however, its assessment has traditionally received less attention than reading. International research emphasises that effective writing assessment is essential for informing instruction and supporting the development of competent writers, particularly when it is grounded in authentic text production tasks (Graham et al., 2011). In Latin America, the SERCE regional study provided early evidence of the value of assessing writing through complete texts, taking into account both written products and the processes involved (Atorresi, 2010).This study reports the results of a systematic review of empirical studies published between 2010 and 2025 on literacy assessment in primary education (approximately ages 6–12) in Spanish-speaking countries. Twenty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria. Each study was coded according to country, educational level, assessed skills (reading and/or writing), types of writing tasks used, and the availability of reliability and validity evidence.The findings reveal a clear dominance of reading-focused assessment. Only 8 of the 28 studies (28.6%) included an explicit evaluation of writing. When writing was assessed, it was mainly operationalised through transcription tasks, such as dictation and spelling, whereas text production and composition were addressed infrequently and in an unsystematically manner. This pattern contrasts with approaches that advocate formative writing assessment as a key mechanism for improving teaching and learning (Graham et al., 2011).Overall, the results point to a gap between the theoretical conceptualisation of writing as a complex, multidimensional skill and its assessment in applied research. The study highlights the need to strengthen writing assessment in primary education by incorporating text production tasks and explicit assessment criteria. Such advances are essential for the early identification of writing difficulties and for supporting evidence-based educational intervention in Spanish-speaking contexts.ReferencesAtorresi, A. (2010). Escritura: un estudio de las habilidades de los estudiantes de América Latina y el Caribe. OREALC/UNESCO Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Hebert, M. (2011). Informing writing: The benefits of formative assessment. Alliance for Excellent Education.

Writing Fluency Always Matters, No Matter the Writing Technology

Presenting author: Furer, Yves , Zurich University of Teacher Education, Switzerland
Co-author: Kolovou, Dimitra , University of Teacher Education of the Grisons, Switzerland
Co-author: Berger, Stéphanie , Institute for Educational Evaluation, Switzerland
Co-author: Philipp, Maik , Zurich University of Teacher Education, Switzerland
Chair: Fürstenberg, Maurice , Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU), Germany
Keywords: errors and error correction;fluency;handwriting;writing tools and writing technology
Domain: Assessment and Evaluation; See Session Schedule

Abstract

According to the Not-so-Simple View of Writing, transcription is a central component of writing (Ahmed et al., 2022). While the mechanical component of transcription (handwriting/typing) must be learned separately, the spelling component can be transferred from one writing technology to another. Additionally, computers offer additional support with spell checkers. However, there is a lack of studies that have examined the influence of different writing technologies in connection with spell checkers on secondary school students using a large sample size (Feng et al., 2019).The present study therefore investigates: Does the quality and fluency of students' texts differ when they write using different writing technology (handwriting / typing with and without spell checking)? Does the fluency of students' writing with different writing technologies explain differences in the quality of their texts?To answer these questions, 912 students (M = 14 years; 51% female) completed three writing tasks. The first writing task measured writing fluency. Text quality was measured with the second and third tasks (two different text types). Roughly one-third of the students wrote by hand (364), one-third wrote on a computer without spell check (301), and one-third wrote on a computer with spell check (277). Human raters and GPT-4o were used to determine text quality based on a rating scheme with four dimensions: content, coherence & consistency, language, and style.By running analyses of variance, groups differed significantly in writing fluency with less text produced by both computer groups, but not in their text quality (RQ 1). We employed regression analysis and found that writing fluency was a strong predictor of text quality irrespective of writing technology (RQ 2). Overall, our results emphasize the importance of writing fluency for writing practice in schools. Students need sufficient exercise with all writing technologies.References: Ahmed, Y., Kent, S., Cirino, P. T., & Keller-Margulis, M. (2022). The Not-So-Simple View of Writing in Struggling Readers/Writers. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 38(3), 272–296. Feng, L., Lindner, A., Ji, X. R., & Malatesha Joshi, R. (2019). The roles of handwriting and keyboarding in writing: a meta-analytic review. Reading and Writing, 32(1), 33–63.

Writing Profiles of German-Speaking Children: A Latent Profile Analysis in Grades Three and Five

Presenting author: Berner-Nayer, Simone , University of Fribourg, Switzerland
Chair: Fürstenberg, Maurice , Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU), Germany
Keywords: acquisition;fluency;speaking and writing;writing skills
Domain: Teaching and Teacher Education; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Writing Profiles of German-Speaking Children: A Latent Profile Analysis in Grades Three and FiveChildren’s writing performance is based on a complex interplay of cognitive, linguistic, and written language components (Philipp, 2020). Therefore it is expected that children differ in their writing skills, and no uniform construct of writing performance exists. Studies addressing these questions often group participants’ performances using cluster or latent profile analyses. However, only a few such studies exist for writing, mainly from English-speaking countries, indicating that no universal writing profile exists and multiple profiles can be identified (e.g., Sandler et al., 1992; Troia et al., 2022). Compared to other domains, such as reading, research on writing remains limited (Troia et al., 2022).The present study addresses this gap in the German-speaking context. The sample comprised 514 children from Swiss German schools in grades three and five. Latent profile analyses were conducted separately for each grade to examine how many writing profiles could be identified based on phonological working memory, handwriting, spelling, linguistic knowledge, basic reading skills, writing fluency, and text quality. Four profiles emerged in both grades: weak, below-average, above-average, and competent writers. Components were aligned within profiles, with the weakest and most competent showing greater variability.These results contribute to a better understanding of individual differences in writing and provide implications for assessment and targeted support. Philipp, M. (2020). Grundlagen der effektiven Schreibdidaktik: Und der systematischen schulischen Schreibförderung (8. erweiterte Aufl.). Schneider Verlag Hohengehren GmbH. Sandler, A. D., Watson, T. E., Footo, M., Levine, M. D., Coleman, W. L. & Hooper, S. R. (1992). Neurodevelopmental Study of Writing Disorders in Middle Childhood. Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 13(1), 17–23.Troia, G. A., Wang, H. & Lawrence, F. R. (2022). Latent profiles of writing-related skills, knowledge, and motivation for elementary students and their relations to writing performance across multiple genres. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 71, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2022.102100

Writing to learn in the new A(I)ge

Presenting author: Staats, Julia , University Utrecht, Netherlands
Chair: Grabowski, Joachim , Leibniz University, Germany
Keywords: academic writing;education;Generative AI;writing to learn
Domain: Higher Education; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Writing-to-learn (WTL) can increase students’ understanding of disciplinary content (Armstrong et al., 2008; Bangert-Drowns et al., 2004). However, since generative artificial intelligence (genAI) was made freely available, we observe in our courses (Utrecht University, Bachelor Biology) that students use genAI during their thinking and writing processes for writing assignments. When genAI helps with or even takes over processes in the students’ writing process, the question arises whether WTL is still relevant as learning approach in future education. This study aimed to gain insight into how third-year university students perceive writing assignments and use genAI. Students from the final bachelor thesis course were invited to fill in an anonymous survey on genAI-use, self-efficacy for academic writing, writing beliefs, and how they experience academic writing in general. Results from close ended questions showed that students (n = 29) generally report that writing helps them understand content better, with no significant difference between students who do use genAI (n = 19) and students who do not use genAI (n = 10), t(26,637) = 1,75, p = 0,093. We also found no significant difference in how they experience academic writing (t(19,056) = -0,29, p = 0,774) and writing self-efficacy (H(1) = 0,544, p = 0,461) between these groups. Students who use genAI for writing assignments mostly use it as a brainstorm partner and to improve self-written texts and spelling. They least use it to generate texts, to compare literature, and to verify if their own text corresponds to the content of the source. Students give different reasons not to use genAI. Mainly low reliability and quality of AI-generated texts and it’s negative influence on learning were mentioned. This study forms a basis for a follow-up study across our whole student population to see if and how genAI-use poses a risk on the WTL-process throughout the bachelor.

A Pilot Study of Expressive Writing in Educational Rehabilitation for Neurodegenerative Diseases

Presenting author: Pintér, Henriett , Semmelweis University, Hungary
Co-author: Molnar, Pal , Semmelweis University, Hungary
Co-author: Albert, Csilla , Cultural Journal of Székelyföld, Romania
Chair: Keller, Stefan , Zurich University of Teacher Education, Switzerland
Keywords: case study;intervention study;motivational and emotional factors in writing;therapeutic writing
Domain: Learning and Special Education; See Session Schedule

Abstract

The aim of the study was to examine the applicability of expressive writing among neurodegenerative patients in the form of an intervention implemented as a supplementary writing task performed at home in connection with institutional, guided educational rehabilitation sessions. In the rehabilitation of neurodegenerative patients, cost-effective interventions that can be integrated into everyday life and can have beneficial effects on emotional well-being are increasingly gaining attention. Expressive writing has been used in learning situations, among other things, to improve well-being (Park et al., 2014), to increase working memory (Farthoukh & Chanquoy, 2020), and to reduce anxiety and caregiver burden in patients with neurodegenerative diseases (Cash & Lagerman, 2015) and stroke survivors and their relatives (Beauchamp et al., 2023). Educational rehabilitation based on the Pető method provides complex support for the physical, emotional, and social functioning of people with neurodegenerative diseases within an institutional setting, promoting their learning processes and well-being. Expressive writing has not yet been used among such patients in the Central European region. Eleven people engaged in a 20-minute writing task on four consecutive days to disclose their experiences, followed by reflections on each session (Pennebaker & Evans, 2018). We examined whether there were differences in self-reflections after writing on consecutive days and what linguistic patterns emerged in the self-reflections. Quantitative analysis using the Friedman test revealed a significant difference between the first and third days in the expression of deep thoughts and feelings, while qualitative content analysis identified seven recurring linguistic patterns in the participants' reflections, such as: "It gives me strength," "It helps me organize my thoughts," and "I was able to express myself." These results illustrate how writing serves as a cognitive and emotional tool for organizing experiences, developing self-awareness, and supporting psychological well-being. The results suggest that expressive writing may be a feasible and cost-effective complementary practice in educational rehabilitation. It appears to support participants’ engagement, motivation, and sense of coherence within learning-based therapeutic activities.

Corpus Insights for Teaching Case Analysis Recommendation Writing

Presenting author: Gomez Laich, Maria Pia , Carnegie Mellon University, Qatar
Co-author: Maune, Michael , Massachusetts Institute of Technology, United States
Chair: Keller, Stefan , Zurich University of Teacher Education, Switzerland
Keywords: academic writing;case study;corpus linguistics;professional writing
Domain: Higher Education; See Session Schedule

Abstract

The case analysis is a central genre in business and information systems programs, requiring students to apply disciplinary knowledge to identify issues and propose recommendations (Nathan, 2013). Effective recommendation writing demands that students adopt an argumentative stance, justify their preferred option, and demonstrate evaluative reasoning. Yet many students struggle to argue clearly for one option over others or to evaluate their proposed solution by comparing it to alternatives or addressing limitations.In this presentation, we examine how students construct the Advisory move in case analysis writing, the stage where analysis is transformed into persuasive recommendations. Drawing on Swalesian move analysis (Swales, 1990) and Systemic Functional Linguistics (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014), we analyzed two corpora: (1) the British Academic Written English corpus and (2) the Information Systems Writing in Qatar corpus, which comprises 98 undergraduate case analyses (381,824 tokens) produced at an American branch campus in the Middle East. From these corpora, we built a specialized subcorpus of 70 recommendation-driven texts (256,385 tokens) to examine how the Advisory move is realized. This subcorpus was annotated in UAM CorpusTool (O’Donnell, 2023) to develop a scheme of rhetorical sub-moves: Orientation (framing, theoretical grounding), Argument (reasons for/against options), and Recommendation (endorsement, implementation, rejection). Complementary n-gram analysis identified recurrent lexical, modal, and evaluative strategies students use to calibrate obligation, contingency, and certainty.By making visible the rhetorical sub-moves and linguistic resources that underpin effective recommendations, we argue that explicit teaching of these patterns is essential for strengthening students’ recommendation writing. Linking corpus analysis to pedagogical practice, we show how writing research can inform instructional interventions that improve the quality of student arguments in case analysis genres.ReferencesHalliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2014). Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar (4th ed.). Routledge.Nathan, P. (2013). Academic writing in the business school: The genre of the business case report. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12(1), 57–68.O’Donnell, M. (2023). UAM CorpusTool 3.3.Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Press.

Development of advanced written discourse in linguistically diverse students

Presenting author: Bachmann, Alina , Osnabrueck University, Germany
Chair: Weder, Mirjam , University of Basel, Switzerland
Keywords: developmental aspects of writing ability;evaluation and assessment of writing competence;language-specific and cross-linguistic studies;literacy
Domain: -; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Part of the literacy competence is being able to write texts according to (communicative) goals (Berman, 2016). Governed by school‑taught structural norms (Tolchinsky, 2020), this is essential for academic success. While lower secondary students are still acquiring these norms, they already have informal experience with various text types. Prior research shows multilingual pupils often lag behind monolingual peers in school‑language literacy (Busse & Hardy, 2023), but most studies focus on primary education and use simple binary (monolingual-multilingual) comparisons leaving the lower‑secondary phase and the nuanced impact of language background under‑explored. As part of a PHD project this study asks:How do lower secondary students show literacy competence in written texts? How does language background affect these texts?Narrative and argumentative essays from 11 fifth‑graders and 12 ninth‑graders in Germany are analysed for macro‑structure, reader orientation, cohesion, and orthography. Student’s language background is assessed using a questionnaire. Findings reveal that although fifth‑graders employ many textual elements, they frequently deviate from school‑norms; ninth‑graders produce texts with more normative structures. Thus, students entering high school already have a functional notion of how to achieve narrating or arguing goals, even if they do not fully apply canonical devices. Moreover, family language use loses influence on text production when students have had sufficient schooling in the test language. The results have didactic implications towards a more communicative approach of writing instruction. Berman, R. A. (2016). Linguistic Literacy and Later Language Development. In J. Perera, M. Aparici, E. Rosado, & N. Salas (Eds.), Written and Spoken Language Development across the Lifespan: Essays in Honour of Liliana Tolchinsky (pp. 181-200). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21136-7_12 Busse, V., & Hardy, I. (2023). Literalität und Mehrsprachigkeit: Begriffsklärungen, Förderansätze und Forschungsbefunde. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 51(2), 149-168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42010-023-00175-0 Tolchinsky, L. (2020). Text Writing at the Core of Literacy Discourse. In R. A. Alves, T. Limpo, & R. M. Joshi (Eds.), Reading-Writing Connections: Towards Integrative Literacy Science (pp. 163-168). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-38811-9_10

Does hybrid feedback foster L2 writing development?

Presenting author: De Clercq, Orphee , Ghent University, Belgium
Presenting author: Özturan, Tuba , Erzincan Binali Yıldırım University, Türkiye
Chair: Weder, Mirjam , University of Basel, Switzerland
Keywords: EFL and ESL writing;feedback;Generative AI;natural language processing (NLP)
Domain: Learning and Instructional Technology; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Feedback is a pivotal component of both L1 and L2 students’ writing development (McCarthy et al., 2022), but providing in-depth feedback is a labour-intensive process (Godwin-Jones, 2022). Recent developments in generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) have increased interest in its use for providing personalized and real-time feedback in second language (L2) writing instruction. However, there is limited research on how GenAI-feedback combined with teacher mediation/control may support L2 writers’ development over time. Therefore, this study aims to investigate whether such hybrid feedback triggers the development of linguistic complexity in L2 writing.The study was conducted in a 15-week undergraduate Writing Skills course at a medium-sized university in Türkiye. Participants were 19 native Turkish students from the Department of English Translation and Interpretation with A2-level English proficiency. During the course, they completed eight timed, paragraph-level writing tasks across multiple genres, such as opinion, definition, process, and narrative, without technological support. After each task, students typed their drafts into shared Google Docs. They then received hybrid feedback: First, the course lecturer used GenAI (ChatGPT) to receive structured feedback focusing on the quality of the topic sentence, three common linguistic errors, three common global errors, and a fully revised version of the paragraph. Second, the course lecturer reviewed the GenAI-generated feedback and selected only accurate and appropriate responses, which were then shared with the students. Also, students wrote short reflection reports explaining how they engaged with the feedback and which suggestions they focused on. The dataset includes students’ original writing tasks, the hybrid feedback, and the reflection reports.The data analysis is still ongoing and focuses on analysing the linguistic complexity, considering both lexical and grammatical aspects (Bulté & Housen, 2012). To this purpose all text versions have been processed with the NLP tools for the Social Sciences (https://www.linguisticanalysistools.org/) and by selecting only those measures which are theoretically relevant (Bulté et al., 2025). By adopting a longitudinal perspective, this study aims to examine patterns of development rather than one-time improvements. Overall, this study contributes to discussions on the pedagogical efficiency of hybrid feedback in L2 writing instruction.

Examining Writing and Reasoning in Dutch History Textbook Questions

Presenting author: Menke, Remco , University of Amsterdam, Netherlands
Co-author: Van Boxtel, Carla , University of Amsterdam, Netherlands
Co-author: van Weijen, Daphne , University of Amsterdam, Netherlands
Co-author: van Drie, Jannet , University of Amsterdam, Netherlands
Chair: Grabowski, Joachim , Leibniz University, Germany
Keywords: education;literacy;writing in the disciplines;writing tasks
Domain: Teaching and Teacher Education; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Examining Writing and Reasoning in Dutch History Textbook Questions One of the main challenges in history education is students’ difficulty in applying abstract historical concepts in writing. Knowledge of substantive concepts is essential for understanding the past and contributes significantly to the quality of historical reasoning (van Boxtel & van Drie, 2018). However, students particularly struggle with using historical concepts in their written responses (van Boxtel et al., 2024). Additionally, their answers often lack structure and coherence (van Drie et al., 2014) as well as explicit use of historical concepts. The study’s main research question is: What are the language and discipline-specific demands of written answers to textbook questions with substantive historical concepts in 8th grade? Little is known about these discipline-specific literacy requirements for answering questions, even though textbooks are widely used in history education (Bernhard, 2018). We selected textbooks from four different publishers. For four topics, we analysed what is expected from students by examining textbook questions (n = 361). Among other aspects, we examined which historical concepts are required in written responses, as well as what forms of language support are provided, such as writing frames. We also considered requirements for students to incorporate specific concepts and express ideas in their own words. In addition, written answers on these assignments were analysed (n = 50), with four students completing the tasks while thinking aloud. Preliminary findings show that history textbook questions offer students little opportunity to practice reasoning and writing with substantive concepts. Furthermore, our analysis indicates that many students struggle with questions that require historical reasoning with these concepts. Overall, this study identifies the domain-specific demands associated with writing in history education and emphasises their significance. The main findings of this study form the foundation for a lesson design to be developed in a follow-up study. During the poster presentation, we hope to receive feedback on the findings, the analysis, and how the lesson design builds on these results.

From Ratings to Formative Feedback: An AI-Based System for Automated Essay Scoring

Presenting author: König, Nina , Institut für Bildungsevaluation, Switzerland
Co-author: Berger, Stéphanie , Institut für Bildungsevaluation, Switzerland
Co-author: Stahlhut, Laura , Institut für Bildungsevaluation, Switzerland
Co-author: Debelak, Rudolf , Universität Zürich, Switzerland
Chair: Weder, Mirjam , University of Basel, Switzerland
Keywords: evaluation and assessment of writing competence;feedback;Generative AI;natural language processing (NLP)
Domain: Assessment and Evaluation; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Feedback is widely recognised as one of the most powerful influences on learning, particularly in the development of writing competence. However, in everyday classroom practice, the provision of detailed and timely feedback on student texts is constrained by limited time resources. Automated essay scoring (AES) has the potential to mitigate this tension, provided that it is pedagogically sound and sensitive to the complexity of writing.This poster presents the design and underlying architecture of an AI-based AES system developed for primary and lower secondary education. The system generates structured feedback within seconds, addressing four core dimensions of writing: content quality, coherence and cohesion, language accuracy, and stylistic appropriateness. In addition to score-based ratings across eight criteria, the system provides qualitative, dimension-specific feedback designed to support formative learning processes.The development of the system builds on a large empirical foundation of 36,739 digitised student essays that were evaluated by trained human raters. By combining large language models with targeted natural language processing techniques and educational assessment frameworks, the system aims to produce automated feedback that is more consistent, transparent, and pedagogically grounded than that of general-purpose AI applications. The poster outlines these design principles and explains the rationale underlying the selected feedback dimensions.The poster then focuses on how these principles are operationalised in practice. It is shown how the system structures multi-dimensional feedback, generates qualitative comments from textual features, and presents feedback in an interpretable manner for educational use. Particular attention is given to interface and feedback design choices that support formative use in the classroom and clearly differentiate the system from generic AI-based writing tools.Overall, the poster contributes to current discussions on AI in writing education by illustrating how automated feedback systems can be designed to augment instructional practice and support learning in classroom contexts.

From research to classroom: Implementing evidence-based writing practices

Presenting author: Sieveke, Pia , University of Münster, Germany
Co-author: Busse, Vera , University of Münster, Germany
Co-author: Graham, Steve , Arizona State University, United States
Chair: Keller, Stefan , Zurich University of Teacher Education, Switzerland
Keywords: intervention study;pedagogy and instruction;writing at school;writing instruction
Domain: Teaching and Teacher Education; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Strengthening students’ writing is essential for long-term academic success (Cutler & Graham, 2008). Despite substantial research on effective writing instruction, evidence-based writing practices are still implemented inconsistently, and research linking professional development (PD), instructional practice, and student outcomes remains limited (Camping et al., 2025).As part of a (quasi-)experimental intervention project conducted in eleven German primary schools (Grades 3 and 4), this explanatory sequential mixed-methods study examined changes in teachers’ writing-related knowledge and practices following PD, their acceptance of the approaches, and the relationship between implementation fidelity and students’ writing outcomes. Quantitative data included pre–post assessments of writing knowledge, perceived feedback effectiveness, and feedback frequency among EG (n = 21) and CG teachers (n = 17). Logbooks from eleven EG teachers were used to classify implementation fidelity (high vs. low) and relate implementation to student writing outcomes (n = 177). Qualitative interviews with the same teachers were analyzed using qualitative content analysis to identify factors that supported or hindered implementation. EG teachers reported significantly higher writing knowledge following PD compared to the CG (ANCOVA: F(1, 35) = 9.91, η²ₚ = .22, p = .003), while no group differences emerged for perceived feedback effectiveness or feedback frequency. Implementation fidelity varied substantially: six teachers showed high adherence to key components of the intervention, whereas five demonstrated low adherence. Interview data highlighted acceptance, perceived fit, and feasibility as key factors shaping instructional decisions. Multilevel analyses revealed a significant time × implementation interaction, showing that students taught by high implementers achieved greater gains in text quality (β = 0.22, p < .001; ICC = .33). The discussion considers factors supporting successful implementation and implications for designing PD, with attention to teacher perceptions and contextual factors that influence the uptake of evidence-based practices. Camping, A., McKeown, D., Williams, M., & Harris, K. R. (2025). Professional development in writing instruction. In J. Fitzgerald, C. A. MacArthur, & S. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of Writing Research (3rd ed., pp. 340–354). Guildford Press. Cutler, L. & Graham, S. (2008). Primary grade writing instruction: A national survey. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(4), 907–919.

Genre blending in contemporary Finnish essays

Presenting author: Lowndes, Ida , University of Helsinki, Finland
Chair: Weder, Mirjam , University of Basel, Switzerland
Keywords: creative writing;text genre;text linguistics;writing and literature
Domain: -; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Genre blending in contemporary Finnish essaysThis study examines Finnish essays from the point of view of genre blending and hybridity (Mäntynen & Shore 2014). The theoretical framework of the study is based on linguistic genre studies and the idea of genre as sociocultural action (e.g. Devitt 2004). The aim of the study is to explore the genre of recent essays published in Finland and the linguistic traits that potentially produce its hybridity.The essay is usually described as creative nonfiction; it blends the techniques of fiction and nonfiction (e.g. Lopate 2013). Mixing different genres comes naturally to the essay, and this makes it a very diverse group of texts. The idea of the essay as a genre has been challenged because of this. This study is based on the idea of the essay as a transgressive genre (see Bahtin 1981). The data consists of three contemporary Finnish essay collections discussing environmental topics. The texts draw on the writer’s personal experiences and knowledge based on other texts and research. The analysis shows that the essays are hybrids blending for example pamphlet, memoir, general nonfiction and narrative nonfiction.ReferencesBahtin M. 1981. Discourse in the novel. – Holquist M. (ed.) The Dialogic imagination. Four essays, 259–422. Austin: University of Texas Press.Devitt A. 2004. Writing genres. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.Lopate P. 2013. To show and to tell. The craft of literary nonfiction. New York: Free Press.Mäntynen A. – Shore S. 2014. What is meant by hybridity? An investigation of hybridity and related terms in genre studies. – Text & Talk 6, 737–758.

Oral language and emergent literacy: Early childhood educators’ beliefs and practices

Presenting author: Vettori, Giulia , University of Florence, Italy
Co-author: Dockrell, Julie , Institute of Education, United Kingdom
Chair: Weder, Mirjam , University of Basel, Switzerland
Keywords: developmental aspects of writing ability;literacy;pedagogy and instruction;reading and writing
Domain: -; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Literacy skills (reading and writing) are fundamental for academic success, employment, and social participation (OECD, 2023). Priori research identified early oral language and emergent literacy skills as key factors for later reading and writing (Mercugliano et al., 2025). Early childhood educators have a key role in providing language learning opportunities and interactions to enhance children’s language and emergent literacy skills. In this study the opportunities afforded in these early educational settings are profiled to contribute to our understanding of effective classroom practice, specifically in closing the gap created by social or language disadvantages. Early childhood educators’ self-reported beliefs and practices in relation to oral language and emergent literacy in Italian settings are examined across four domains: (1) beliefs about their role in promoting emergent literacy including the role of preschools in preparing children to learn to read and write (Beliefs); (2) capture the ways in which early oral language (receptive and expressive language) and emergent literacy (phonological awareness, letter knowledge and sound-signs integration, narrative awareness) are included in preschool education (Practices); (3) identify the time spent on oral language and literacy activities across the day (Quantity of Time) and (4) finally elucidate challenges, resources and barriers related to teacher and class-level variables (Teacher and class factors). The participants are early childhood educators working in Italian settings from both nursery schools (nidi d’infanzia, 0–3 years) and preschools (scuole dell’infanzia, 3–6 years). The teachers completed a literacy beliefs questionnaire adapted from published works (i.e., Besser-Biron et al., 2025; Dockrell et al., 2012; Sandvik et al., 2014; Weadman et al., 2022) which included national educational policies and objectives. Data collection is scheduled for completion by the end of March, with an anticipated sample size of approximately 60 participants. Given previous studies in English contexts we anticipate a positive relationship between beliefs and practices with evidence in how these practices evolve and adapt in response to challenging classroom environments. Ultimately, this study aims to inform the development of targeted professional development programs and evidence-based interventions.

Reciprocal peer feedback with argumentative text structure

Presenting author: Morre, Gabriel , University of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern Switzerland PH (FHNW), Switzerland
Chair: Fürstenberg, Maurice , Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU), Germany
Keywords: collaborative writing;evaluation and assessment of writing competence;intervention study;writing instruction
Domain: -; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Reciprocal peer feedback with argumentative text structureText revision is understood as a sub-competence that enables students to distance themselves from their own text, allowing them to identify inconsistencies and develop alternatives (Baurmann & Pohl, 2009). Cognitively oriented approaches consider revision as a sequence of activities that involve reading, evaluating, and revising the text (MacArthur, 2012).As part of an intervention study on revising argumentative texts in 7th grade, one of three experimental groups used the peer feedback approach Smabusch (N = 106 students). This approach combines the explicit teaching of a text-pattern-based revision strategy (Sturm, 2022) with reciprocal feedback (according to MacArthur, Schwartz & Graham, 1991). The acronym Smabusch focuses on an argumentative text structure (situation, opinion, argument, reasoning and examples to support it, and smash as the “winning argument”).Initial analyses indicate that Smabusch results in a positive change in strategy efficiency. This raises the question of how students in the experimental group use Smabusch to evaluate texts and how they proceed when implementing the strategy. The poster presentation will present further results also focusing on setting a writing goal and evaluating a text. Baurmann, Jürgen; Pohl, Thorsten (2009): Schreiben – Texte verfassen. [Writing – Composing Texts] In: Bremerich-Vos, Albert; Granzer, Dietlinde; Behrens, Ulrike und Köller, Olaf (Hrsg.): Bildungsstandards für die Grundschule. Deutsch konkret. [Educational standards for elementary school. German in concrete terms] Berlin: Cornelsen Verlag Scriptor. S. 75–103.MacArthur, Charles A.; Graham, Steve; Schwartz, Shirley (1991): Knowledge of Revision and Revising Behavior among Students with Learning Disabilities. In: Learning Disability Quarterly 14/1. S. 61–73.MacArthur, C. A. (2012). Evaluation and Revision. In V.W. Berninger (Ed.), Past, present, and future contributions of cognitive writing research to cognitiv psychology (pp. 461–483). Psychology Press.Sturm, A. (2022). Prozess- und produktorientierte Schreibförderung in Kombination [Process- and product-oriented writing instruction combined]. In V. Busse, N. Müller & L. Siekmann (Hrsg.), Schreiben fachübergreifend fördern. Theoretische Grundlagen und Praxisanregungen für Schule, Unterricht und Lehrerinnen- und Lehrerbildung [Promoting interdisciplinary writing. Theoretical foundations and practical recommendations for schools, instruction and teacher education] (S. 96–113). Klett Kallmeyer.

Scaffolding Multilingual Writers in Source-Based Argumentative Writing: An Intervention Study

Presenting author: Debrah, Cecilia Owusu , University of Energy and Natural Resources, Ghana
Co-author: Yegblemenawo, Stella Afi Makafui , Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana
Chair: Keller, Stefan , Zurich University of Teacher Education, Switzerland
Keywords: academic writing;AI writing;intervention study;L2
Domain: Developmental Aspects of Instruction; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Source-based argumentative writing remains a demanding task, especially for multilingual writers in higher education, as they are expected to interpret diverse texts, synthesize multiple perspectives, and develop coherent arguments in a second language (Chuang & Yan, 2023). This study draws on a Vygotskian sociocultural perspective on mediated learning to explore how a scaffolded instructional intervention enhances students' engagement with sources in their argumentative writing, particularly given the growing influence of digitally mediated tools on students' academic literacy skills. Conducted over fourteen weeks, the qualitative study involved 60 undergraduate civil engineering students enrolled in the second part of a two-semester academic writing course. The intervention was based on five scaffolded phases: analyzing sources, summarizing, synthesizing, planning, and drafting, designed to make the process manageable and transparent. To reflect authentic writing practices in digitally mediated contexts, students recorded any AI tools they used during task completion. Data sources included 10 semi-structured interviews, classroom observations, instructional materials, and drafts of students’ writing assignments. Braun and Clark’s (2019) reflexive thematic analysis was used to examine how students navigated each stage, the challenges encountered, and the strategies employed to integrate sources into coherent written arguments. Findings show that scaffolded sequences helped students break down complex tasks, identify connections between texts, and build confidence in developing arguments. While AI-assisted tools provided localized support, the scaffolded activities remained the primary guide for deeper interpretive and rhetorical choices essential for effective academic writing. This research offers valuable insights into how structured scaffolding can aid L2 writers’ growth in source-based argumentative writing.

Task Specification and Adaptation in Primary Grade Writing Instruction

Presenting author: Springstein, Sander , Universität zu Köln, Germany
Chair: Keller, Stefan , Zurich University of Teacher Education, Switzerland
Keywords: assessment;writing at school;writing instruction;writing tasks
Domain: -; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Writing tasks play a crucial role in the development of writing competence, as they initiate, guide, and support writing processes. Therefore, recent writing research has placed increasing emphasis on the conceptualization of good writing tasks. In German-speaking countries, the concept of task specification (in German: Profilierung) by Bachmann and Becker-Mrotzek (2010) has gained particular prominence within the field of task-based research. According to this concept, a writing task is considered “good” when it is embedded in an authentic and social context which (1) defines a clear writing purpose, (2) activates or provides the necessary knowledge to complete the task, (3) facilitates social interaction within the writing process, and (4) offers opportunities to observe the effect the text has on its readers.Despite recent progress in task-based research, it remains largely unexplored which writing tasks are implemented in actual classroom practice and to what extent they meet established criteria for good writing tasks. Therefore, as part of a national survey, the current study aims to compile a representative corpus of writing tasks used by primary school teachers in the writing classroom. The corpus will then be evaluated using a newly developed rating scale: Following the concept of task specification (cf. Bachmann & Becker-Mrotzek, 2010), the proposed rating scale is structured around four subscales (i.e., purpose, knowledge, interaction, and effect). Furthermore, the rating scale includes an additional subscale (adaptation) that examines how primary school teachers adapt existing writing tasks to meet the needs of struggling writers (e.g., Graham & Harris, 2005; Grünke & Leonard-Zabel, 2015).References:Bachmann, T. & Becker-Mrotzek, M. (2010): Schreibaufgaben situieren und profilieren. In: T. Pohl & T. Steinhoff (Eds.): Texformen als Lernformen. Duisburg: Gilles & Francke, 191-210. Graham, S. & Harris, K. R. (2005): Improving the Writing Performance of Young Struggling Writers: Theoretical and Programmatic Research From the Center on Accelerating Student Learning. In: Journal of Special Education, 39(1), 19-33. Grünke, M. & Leonard-Zabel, A. M. (2015): How to support struggling writers: What the research stipulates. In: International Journal of Special Education, 30(3), 137-149.

Teaching writing in primary school: Future teachers’ conceptions

Presenting author: Gil, Maria Beatriz , EDUNOVA.ISPA, Portugal
Co-author: Martins, Margarida Alves , ISPA-Instituto Universitário EDUNOVA.ISPA, Portugal
Co-author: Alves Martins, Margarida , ISPA-Instituto Universitário EDUNOVA.ISPA, Portugal
Chair: Keller, Stefan , Zurich University of Teacher Education, Switzerland
Keywords: pedagogy and instruction;writing at school;writing beliefs;writing instruction
Domain: Teaching and Teacher Education; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Writing is a fundamental skill for students' success throughout their schooling, as it is relevant to various school subjects. Graham and Alves (2021) argue that it is necessary to understand the needs of teachers and future teachers so that resources and materials can be developed that enable them to implement teaching activities for written production in an explicit and continuous manner since primary school. In this context, our aim was to analyse future teachers' conceptions regarding the teaching of writing in primary school and the confidence they feel in teaching different types of texts. The participants were 97 master's students at the end of their initial training for teaching in primary school. They attended 4 higher education institutions in Portugal. They answered a questionnaire at the end of their training. In it, they were asked about: their level of confidence in teaching writing when compared to other areas, such as oracy and reading, and the weekly time they considered necessary to devote to teaching it; their level of confidence and perceived relevance regarding the teaching of different types of texts and different components of writing; the relevance they attributed to planning and revising and to various assessment parameters; their knowledge of the teaching resources available to support the teaching of writing; and their perceived training needs. The results revealed that future teachers feel less confident about teaching writing when compared to oracy and reading, despite considering that the same amount of time should be devoted to teaching writing and reading. There was a significant discrepancy between the degree of confidence and the relevance attributed to different components of writing, with the former clearly lower. Regarding text genres, they show more confidence in teaching narrative and descriptive texts than other types of texts. Finally, they demonstrated very limited knowledge of the teaching resources available to support the teaching of writing and highlighted the need for training in planning, writing and revising texts. These results contribute to reflect on the role of initial training in the development of skills for teaching written production and in designing teaching resources to support teaching practices.

Using writing for memorising: pen vs. mobile phone

Presenting author: Breuer, Esther , Universität zu Köln, Germany
Chair: Weder, Mirjam , University of Basel, Switzerland
Keywords: acquisition;cognitive processes;EFL and ESL writing;writing to learn
Domain: Cognitive Science; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Previous research has shown that using (hand) writing for memorising and for language learning is a very effective method, especially for abstract lexical items. Neurocognitive studies have shown that word representations are closely connected to motor areas in the brain that control the writing hand. At the same time, writing practices have changed considerably due to the widespread use of digital devices. This raises the question of whether the relationship between writing movements and memorisation is affected by the use of new technologies. This study examines the influence of different writing tools on the memorisation of words in a first and a foreign language. German students copy words in German (first language) and English (foreign language) using either pen and paper or a mobile phone. The word material includes established, well-known words as well as neologisms that are unfamiliar to the participants. Neologisms are used in order to investigate how new lexical items are encoded and stored under different writing conditions. Participants are divided into two groups according to the writing tool. After the copying task, memory is tested immediately to measure short-term retention. A second memory test is conducted one week later to assess longer-term retention. This design allows for a comparison of memorisation effects depending on the writing tool, the language, and the degree of lexical familiarity. At the time of the conference, results will be available and will be presented and discussed in detail. The study aims to show whether handwriting and mobile phone input lead to different memory outcomes, particularly for neologisms and foreign-language words. By combining insights from embodied cognition research and language learning, this presentation will hopefully contribute to a better understanding of how changing writing technologies may influence lexical processing and memory in educational contexts.

VALIDATION OF WRITING MODELS IN TRANSPARENT ORTHOGRAPHIES: WHY IS IT IMPORTANT?

Presenting author: Jozipović, Marija , Faculty of Education and Rehabilitation Sciences, Croatia
Co-author: Lenček, Mirjana , Faculty of Education and rehabilitation Sciences (University of Zagreb), Croatia
Chair: Weder, Mirjam , University of Basel, Switzerland
Keywords: acquisition;cognitive processes;developmental aspects of writing ability;language-specific and cross-linguistic studies
Domain: Cognitive Science; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Most writing models have been developed and validated in opaque (deep) orthographies such as English. However, language activities like writing are influenced by the specific characteristics of a language and its script. Unlike deep orthographies, transparent (shallow) orthographies (e.g., Croatian, Finnish) are characterised by highly consistent and predictable phoneme–grapheme correspondences, approaching a 1:1 relationship (Lenček & Anđel, 2011). Consequently, both literacy acquisition (Kuvač Kraljević et al., 2024) and the nature of reading and writing difficulties differ from those in English (e.g., Lenček, 2012; Reis et al., 2020). Compared to widely studied languages such as English, writing in transparent orthographies has been less extensively researched, and studies validating existing models in these languages are scarce. Writing models provide theoretical frameworks for understanding the (meta)cognitive, (meta)linguistic, and (grapho)motor processes involved in writing, as well as the factors that determine the quality of the final product. h. To claim universal applicability, writing models must be applicable across diverse linguistic and orthographic contexts. One of the main challenges in validating writing models concerns the role of orthographic transparency, for which research remains limited.This paper aims to present key developments and shifts in writing models that have emerged from critiques of earlier models, highlights persisting gaps in understanding the components and relationships within writing models, and examines their generalisability across different scripts, orthographies, and languages, with particular attention to transparent languages such as Croatian (Kuvač Kraljević et al., 2024; Olujić Tomazin et al., 2023). Current literature indicates a lack of studies validating writing models in transparent orthographies, where features facilitating literacy acquisition reduce the influence of transcription on the quality and fluency of written discourse. Finally, interdisciplinary and longitudinal research across languages and populations, including multilingual speakers, is essential to test the validity of existing models and to identify both universal and context-specific components.

Writing workshop in classrooms, what for ?

Presenting author: Keller, Lorenzo Dubois , Aix-Marseille University, France
Co-author: Barbier, Marie-Laure , Aix-Marseille University, France
Co-author: Quaranta, Jean-Marc , Aix-Marseille University, France
Chair: Weder, Mirjam , University of Basel, Switzerland
Keywords: cognitive processes;creative writing;literacy;writing at school
Domain: Cognitive Science; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Writing workshops in classrooms, what for ? Dubois-Keller, L., Quaranta, J.M., Barbier, M.L. Creative writing workshops are, in principle, suitable and adaptable to all school levels (Butzek, Barbier & Quaranta, 2023). They are based on a didactic model of "spiral reading, writing, rereading, rewriting " (Oriol-Boyer, 2013), and teachers who use them report numerous cognitive and conative benefits for students, including improved writing skills, motivation, and literacy skills. However, little scientific research has been conducted on the effects of creative writing workshops in schools.This study presents a systematic literature review conducted using the PRISMA method, with the aim of identifying the possible impacts of creative writing training in a secondary school context. 681 articles were identified across eight databases in social sciences. 23 were selected for this review based on exclusion and inclusion criteria. The following were excluded: articles not dealing with the teaching of creative writing; or on its effects on cognitive, conative, or literacy skills; theoretical studies and studies dating from before 2005. The following were included: articles that offered participants, high school students, a creative writing intervention; open access articles; articles in English or French. The results showed that creative writing in general is used almost worldwide and could have beneficial effects on the cognitive skills (creativity, problem solving), conative skills (motivation, self-efficacy, agency), and literacy skills (reading, writing) of high school students. However, these effects were not always similar across the studies analyzed. It seems that creative writing is a concept that needs to be adapted to the school setting according to teachers' objectives and class level. However, studies show that the skills developed during creative writing activities are transferable to other academic texts expected in the school context. Oriol-Boyer, C. (2013). Ateliers d’écriture, quarante ans d’élaboration, Mémoires d’un parcours entre théorie et pratiques. Dans C. Oriol-Boyer & D. Bilous (dir.), Ateliers d’écriture littéraire (pp. 25-89). Paris : Hermann.Quaranta, J.-M., Barbier, M-L, & Butzek, A.-M. (2023). écriture créative et formation, In N. Bonnardel, F. Girandola, E. Bonetto & T. Lubart (Eds.). La Créativité en Situations : Théories et applications (pp. 285-294). Paris : Dunod.

Written Language Production in Children with Developmental Language Disorder: Evidence from Arabic

Presenting author: Taha, Juhayna , University College London, United Kingdom
Co-author: Salloum, Shada , Birzeit University, Palestine
Co-author: Dockrell, Julie , Institute of Education, United Kingdom
Chair: Weder, Mirjam , University of Basel, Switzerland
Keywords: language-specific and cross-linguistic studies;spelling issues;writing for specific needs;writing impairment
Domain: Learning and Special Education; See Session Schedule

Abstract

Written Language Production in Children with Developmental Language Disorder: Evidence from ArabicWriting systems vary in their orthographic depth and in the linguistic units they encode, leading to crosslinguistic variations in writing development. This necessitates language-specific frameworks for writing assessments. This study focuses on Arabic, where data on writing development and difficulties is scarce. The Arabic script has distinctive features, including the similarity of basic letter forms, ligature, allography, and nonlinearity. These properties place unique demands on writing development, especially for children with Developmental Language Disorder (DLD), who are at heightened risk for persistent writing difficulties.This study compares the written language production of Arabic-speaking children with DLD to that of typically developing (TD) children. It also explores the relationship between spoken and written language production.We assessed Arabic writing using a word dictation task (spelling) and picture-elicited written texts (written narratives). We measured spoken language through expressive vocabulary, expressive grammar, nonword repetition, and oral narratives. Sixty Arabic-speaking children in Ramallah, Palestine, aged 8 to 12 years, participated across three groups: children with DLD, age-matched TD children, and language-matched TD children. This design allows us to determine whether writing profiles in DLD reflect developmental delay or qualitatively distinct writing patterns. Data collection will be completed by mid-February.Planned analyses will examine written texts across key dimensions (productivity, complexity, accuracy, and overall writing quality), including accuracy and the frequency and nature of spelling, morphological and syntactic errors. Regression analyses will identify the extent to which spoken language predicts the different dimensions of children’s writing. Implications for research and practice will be outlined.

Poster Presentation

Presentations

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract