Poster Presentation 4

Session Page

Session Information

This page shows the session details and the presentations assigned to this session.

Back to programme overview
Add this session to calendar

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

Keywords
case study;intervention study;motivational and emotional factors in writing;therapeutic writing
Domain
Learning and Special Education

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

Keywords
academic writing;case study;corpus linguistics;professional writing
Domain
Higher Education

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.

Examining Writing and Reasoning in Dutch History Textbook Questions

Keywords
education;literacy;writing in the disciplines;writing tasks
Domain
Teaching and Teacher Education

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 research to classroom: Implementing evidence-based writing practices

Keywords
intervention study;pedagogy and instruction;writing at school;writing instruction
Domain
Teaching and Teacher Education

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.

Reciprocal peer feedback with argumentative text structure

Keywords
collaborative writing;evaluation and assessment of writing competence;intervention study;writing instruction
Domain
-

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

Keywords
academic writing;AI writing;intervention study;L2
Domain
Developmental Aspects of Instruction

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

Keywords
assessment;writing at school;writing instruction;writing tasks
Domain
-

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

Keywords
pedagogy and instruction;writing at school;writing beliefs;writing instruction
Domain
Teaching and Teacher Education

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.