The Effect of Strategic Planning Training on Cohesion in EFL Learners’ Essays

References

• Beauvais, C., Olive, T., & Passerault, J. M. (2011). Why are some texts good and others not? Relationship between text quality and management of the writing process. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(2), 415–428. doi:10.1037/a0022545
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bi, C. (2008). A longitudinal study on written interlanguage of English majors (Unpublished dissertation). Nanjing Agriculture University, China.
   Google Scholar
• Braaksma, M. A. H., Rijlaarsdam, G., Van den Bergh, H., & Van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M. (2004). Observational learning and its effects on the orchestration of writing processes. Cognition and Instruction, 22(1), 1–36. doi:10.1207/s1532690Xci2201_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crookes, G. (1989). Planning and interlanguage variation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11(04), 367–383. doi:10.1017/S0272263100008391
   Google Scholar
• Crossley, S. A., & McNamara, D. S. (2011). Text coherence and judgments of essay quality: Models of quality and coherence. In L. Carlson, C. Hoelscher, & T. F. Shipley (Ed.), Proceedings of the 29th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1236–1241). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
   Google Scholar
• Crystal, D. (1997). A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics (4th ed.). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Ellis, R. (2005). Planning and task-based performance: Theory and research. In R. Ellis (Eds.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 3–34). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Ellis, R., & Yuan, P. (2004). The effects of planning on fluency, complexity, and accuracy in second language writing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26(01), 59–84. doi:10.1017/S0272263104261034
   Google Scholar
• Flower, L., Shriver, A. K., Carey, L., Haas, C., & Hayes, R. J. (1989). Planning in writing: the cognition of a constructive process. Technical Report No. 34. Centre for the Study of Writing, University of California, Berkeley.
   Google Scholar
• Foltz, P. W. (2007). Discourse coherence and LSA. In T. K. Landauer, D. S. McNamara, S. Dennis, & W. Kintsch (Eds.), Handbook of latent semantic analysis (pp. 167–184). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Garing, A. G. (2014). Coherence in the Argumentative Essays of First Year College of Liberal Arts Students at De La Salle University. Presented in 2014 DLSU Research Congress. Manila: De La Salle University.
   Google Scholar
• Geng, X., & Ferguson, G. (2013). Strategic planning in task-based language teaching: The effects of participatory structure and task type. System, 41(4), 982–993. doi:10.1016/j.system.2013.09.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graesser, A., McNamara, D., Louwerse, M., & Cai, Z. (2004). Coh-Metrix: Analysis of text on cohesion and language. Behavior Research Methods, 36(2), 193–202. doi:10.1080/01638530902959943.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Hyland, K. (2002). Teaching and researching writing. London: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, M. D., Mercado, L., & Acevedo, A. (2012). The effect of planning sub-processes on L2 writing fluency, grammatical complexity, and lexical complexity. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(3), 264–282. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2012.05.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Louwerse, M. (2002). An analytic and cognitive parameterization of coherence relations. Cognitive Linguistics, 12, 291–315. doi: 10.1515/cogl.2002.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McNamara, D., Louwerse, M., McCarthy, P., & Graesser, A. (2010). Coh-Metrix: Capturing linguistic features of cohesion. Discourse Processes, 47(4), 292–330. doi:10.1080/01638530902959943
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nugent, P. “ATTENTIONAL FOCUS,” in PsychologyDictionary.org, April 7, (2013). https://psychologydictionary.org/attentional-focus/ (accessed June 22, 2018).
   Google Scholar
• Ong, J., & Zhang, L. J. (2010). Effects of task complexity on the fluency and lexical complexity in EFL students’ argumentative writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(4), 218–233. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2010.10.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ortega, L. (2005). What do learners plan? Learner-driven attention to form during pre-task planning. In R. Ellis (Eds.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 77–109). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Robinson, P. (2001). Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 22(1), 27–57. doi:10.1093/applin/22.1.27
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robinson, P. (Ed.). (2011). Researching the cognition hypothesis on language learning and performance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Robinson, P., & Gilabert, R. (2007). Task complexity, the cognition hypothesis and second language learning and performance. IRAL – International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 45(3), 161–176. doi: 10.1515/iral.2007.007.
   Google Scholar
• Sangarun, J. (2005). The effects of focusing on meaning and form in strategic planning. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 110–143). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Totten, S. Eaton, H. Dirst, S. & Lesieur, C. (Eds.). (2006). Spark the brain, ignite the pen: Free write for kindergarten through high school teachers and beyond. Charlotte, U.S.A.: Information Age Publishing Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Whalen, K., & Ménard, N. (1995). L1 and L2 writers’ strategic and linguistic knowledge: a model of multiple-level discourse processing. Language Learning, 45(3), 381–418. doi:10.1111/j.1467-1770.1995.tb00447.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar