Effects of intervention on self-efficacy and text quality in elementary school students’ narrative writing

References

• Bandura A. Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs (NJ): Prentice-Hall; 1986.
   Google Scholar
• Bandura A. Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs (NJ): Prentice-Hall; 1977.
   Google Scholar
• Bandura A. Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. Basingstoke: W. H. Freeman; 1997.
   Google Scholar
• Schunk DH. Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educ Psychol. 1991;26:207–231.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coutinho SA, Neuman G. A model of metacognition, achievement goal orientation, learning style and self-efficacy. Learn Environ Res. 2008;11:131–151.
   Google Scholar
• Bandura A. Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educ Psychol. 1993;28:117–148.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bruning R, Kauffman DF. Self-efficacy beliefs and motivation in writing development. In: MacArthur C, Graham S, Fitzgerald J. Handbook of writing research. New York: Guilford Publications; 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Rijlaarsdam G, Braaksma M, Couzijn M, et al. Observation of peers in learning to write: practice and research. J Writ Res. 2008;1:53–83.
   Google Scholar
• Braaksma MAH, Rijlaarsdam G, van den Bergh H. Observational learning and the effects of model-observer similarity. J Educ Psychol. 2002;94:405–415.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raedts M, Rijlaarsdam G, van Waes L, et al. Observational learning through video-based models: impact on students' accuracy of self-efficacy beliefs, task knowledge and writing performances. In: Hidi S, Boscolo P, editors. Writing and motivation. Oxford: Elsevier; 2007. p. 219–238.
   Google Scholar
• Raedts M, Steendam E, Grez L, et al. The effect of different types of video modelling on undergraduate students' motivation and learning in an academic writing course. J Writ Res. 2017;8:399–435.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muenks K, Wigfield A, Eccles JS. I can do this! The development and calibration of children’s expectations for success and competence beliefs. Dev Rev. 2018;48:24–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pajares F. Empirical properties of a scale to assess writing self-efficacy in school contexts. Meas Eval Counsel Dev. 2007;39:239–249.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stipek D. Good instruction is motivating. In: Wigfield A, Eccles JS, editors. Development of achievement motivation. San Diego (CA): Academic Press; 2002. p. 309–332.
   Google Scholar
• Schunk DH, Meece JL. Self-efficacy development in adolescences. In: Pajares F, Urdan T, editors. Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents. Greenwich (CT). Information Age Publishing; 2006. p. 71–96.
   Google Scholar
• De Smedt F, Merchie E, Barendse M, et al. Cognitive and motivational challenges in writing: studying the relation with writing performance across students' gender and achievement level. Read Res Q. 2018;53:249–272.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klassen R. A question of calibration: a review of the self-efficacy beliefs of students with learning disabilities. Learn Disabil Quart. 2002;25:88–102.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bandura A. Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. In: Pajares F, Urdan T, editors. Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents. Greenwich (CT): Information Age Publishing; 2006. p. 307–337.
   Google Scholar
• Bruning R, Dempsey M, Kauffman DF, et al. Examining dimensions of self-efficacy for writing. J Educ Psychol. 2013;105:25–38.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
•  Bruning R, Dempsey M, Kauffman DF, et al. Self-efficacy for writing scale. Database record retrieved from PsycTESTS; 2013.
   Google Scholar
•  OECD. PISA 2015 results. (Volume I), Excellence and Equity in Education, PISA. Paris: OECD Publishing; 2016. doi:10.1787/9789264266490-en
   Google Scholar
• Pajares F, Miller MD, Johnson MJ. Gender differences in writing self-beliefs of elementary school students. J Educ Psychol. 1999;91:50–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pajares F, Valiante G. Grade level and gender differences in the writing self-beliefs of middle school students. Contemp Educ Psychol. 1999;24:390–405.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pajares F, Valiante G. Gender differences in writing motivation and achievement of middle school students: a function of gender orientation? Contemp Educ Psychol. 2001;26:366–381.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pajares F. Self-efficacy beliefs, motivation, and achievement in writing: a review of the literature. Read Writ Quart. 2003;19:139–158.
   Google Scholar
• Tillema M, van den Bergh H, Rijlaarsdam G, et al. Quantifying the quality difference between L1 and L2 essays: a rating procedure with bilingual raters and L1 and L2 benchmark essays. Lang Test. 2013;30:71–97.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
•  Grenner E, Åkerlund V, Asker-Árnason L, et al. Improving narrative writing skills through observational learning: a study of Swedish 5th-grade students. Educ Rev. 2018. doi:10.1080/00131911.2018.1536035
   Google Scholar
• Feagans L, Appelbaum MI. Validation of language subtypes in learning disabled children. J Educ Psychol. 1986;78:358–364.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johansson V. Developmental aspects of text production in writing and speech [dissertation]. Lund: Department of Linguistics and Phonetics, Centre for Languages and Literature, Lund University; 2009.
   Google Scholar
• McCutchen D. From novice to expert: implications of language skills and writing-relevant knowledge for memory during the development of writing. J Writ Res. 2011;3:51–68.
   Google Scholar
• Wolff U. Lilla DUVAN. Stockholm: Hogrefe Psykologiförlaget AB; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Bishop D. Test for reception of grammar. version 2. Swedish version. Stockholm: Pearson Education; 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Magnusson E, Nauclér K. SL40: läsförståelse: meningar [SL40: reading comprehension: sentences]. Lund: Studentlitteratur AB; 2010.
   Google Scholar
•  Skolverket. Curriculum for the compulsory school, preschool class and school-age educare 2011. Stockholm: Norsteds juridik; 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Wewers ME, Lowe NK. A critical review of visual analogue scales in the measurement of clinical phenomena. Res Nurs Health. 1990;13:227–236.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
•  Strömqvist S. Discourse flow and linguistic information structuring: explorations in speech and writing (Gothenburg papers in theoretical linguistics: 78). Gothenburg: Göteborg University; 1996.
   Google Scholar
• van de Weijer J, Åkerlund V, Johansson V, et al. Writing intervention in university students with normal hearing and in those with hearing impairment: can observational learning improve argumentative text writing? Logoped Phoniatr Vocol. 2018;44:1–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graham S, Daley SG, Aitken AA, et al. Do writing motivational beliefs predict middle school students' writing performance? J Res Read. 2018;41:642–656.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwartz D, Fischhoff B, Krishnamurti T, et al. The Hawthorne effect and energy awareness. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2013;38:15242–15246.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bourdin B, Fayol M. Even in adults, written production is still more costly than oral production. Int J Psychol. 2002;37:219–227.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chanquoy L. Revision processes. In: Beard R, Myhill D, Nystrand M, editors. The SAGE handbook of writing development. London: Sage Publications; 2009. p. 80–97.
   Google Scholar