Toward a Model of Strategies and Summary Writing Performance

REFERENCES

• Alderson, J. C. (1996). The testing of reading. In C. Nuttall ( Ed.), Teaching reading skills in a foreign language ( pp. 212 –228). London, UK: Heinemann.
   Google Scholar
• Alexander, P. A., Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. A. (1998). A perspective on strategy research: Progress and prospects. Educational Psychology Review, 10(2), 129–154.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, N. J. (1991). Individual differences in strategy use in second language reading and testing. The Modern Language Journal, 75(4), 460–472.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arbuckle, J. L. (2010). IBM SPSS Amos 19 user’s guide. Chicago, IL: SPSS Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Asención, Y. (2004). Validation of reading-to-write assessment tasks performed by second language learners. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ.
   Google Scholar
• Baba, K. (2009). Aspects of lexical proficiency in writing summaries in a foreign language. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(3), 191 –208.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental consideration in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bachman, L. F. (2002). Some reflections on task-based language performance assessment. Language Testing, 19(4), 453–476.
   Google Scholar
• Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bartlett, M. S. (1954). A note on the multiplying factors for various chi square approximations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 16(2), 296 –298.
   Google Scholar
• Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Braine, G. (1995). Writing in the natural sciences and engineering. In D. Belcher & G. Braine ( Eds.), Academic writing in a second language: Essays on research and pedagogy ( pp. 113 –134). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
   Google Scholar
• Braine, G. (2001). When an exit test fails. System, 29(2), 221–234.
   Google Scholar
• Byrne, B. M. (1994). Structural equation modeling with EQS and EQS/Windows: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Byrne, B. M., Shavelson, R. J., & Muthén, B. (1989). Testing for the equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures: The issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 105(3), 456 –466.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campbell, C. (1990). Writing with others’ words: Using background reading text in academic compositions. In B. Kroll ( Ed.), Second language writing ( pp. 211 –230). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chapelle, C. A., Enright, M. K., & Jamieson, J. M. (2008). Test score interpretation and use. In C. A. Campbell, M. K. Enright & J. M. Jamieson ( Eds.), Building a validity argument for the Test of English as a Foreign Language ( pp. 1 –25). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Charge, N., & Taylor, L. B. (1997). Recent developments in IELTS. ELT J, 51(4), 374–380.
   Google Scholar
• Cho, Y., Rijmen, F., & Novák, J. (2013). Investigating the effects of prompt characteristics on the comparability of TOEFL iBT integrated writing tasks. Language Testing, 30(4), 513 –534.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coffin, C. (2006). Learning the language of school history. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 38(4), 413 –429.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, A. D. (1994). English for academic purposes in Brazil: The use of summary tasks. In C. Hill & K. Parry ( Eds.), From testing to assessment: English as an international language ( pp. 174 –204). London, England: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, A. D. (2006). The coming of age of research on test-taking strategies. Language Assessment Quarterly, 3(4), 307–331.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, A. D., & Upton, T. A. (2007). “I want to go back to the text”: Response strategies on the reading subtest of the new TOEFL. Language Testing, 24(2), 209–250.
   Google Scholar
• Cordero-Ponce, W. L. (2000). Summarization instruction: Effects on foreign language comprehension and summarization of expository texts. Reading Research and Instruction, 39(4), 329 –350.
   Google Scholar
• Cumming, A., Grant, L., Mulcahy-Ernt, P., & Powers, D. (2004). A teacher-verification study of speaking and writing prototype tasks for a new TOEFL. Language Testing, 21(2), 159–197.
   Google Scholar
• Cumming, A., Kantor, R., Baba, K., Erdosy, U., Eouanzoui, K., & James, M. (2005). Difference in written discourse in independent and integrated prototype tasks for next generation TOEFL. Assessing Writing, 10(1), 5–43.
   Google Scholar
• Cumming, A., Rebuffot, J., & Ledwell, M. (1989). Reading and summarizing challenging texts in first and second languages. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 1(3), 201–219.
   Google Scholar
• Currie, P. (1998). Staying out of trouble: Apparent plagiarism and academic survival. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7(1), 1–18.
   Google Scholar
• Devine, J. (1993). The role of metacognition in second language reading and writing. In J. G. Carson & I. Leki ( Eds.), Reading in the composition classroom: Second language perspectives ( pp. 105 –127). Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Esmaeili, H. (2000). The effects of content knowledge from reading on adult ESL students’ written compositions in an English language test using reading and writing modules. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Esmaeili, H. (2002). Integrated reading and writing tasks and ESL students’ reading and writing performance in an English language test. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 58(4), 599–622.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feak, C., & Dobson, B. (1996). Building on the impromptu: A source-based academic writing assessment. College ESL, 6(1), 73–84.
   Google Scholar
• Flower, L., Schriver, K. A., Carey, L., Haas, C., & Hayes. (1992). Planning in writing: The cognition of a constructive process. In S. P. Witte, N. Nakadate & R. D. Cherry ( Eds.), A rhetoric of doing: Essays on written discourse in honor of James L. Kinneavy ( pp. 181 –243). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fox, J. (2003). From products to process: An ecological approach to bias detection. International Journal of Testing, 3(1), 21 –47.
   Google Scholar
• Fox, J. (2004). Test decisions over time: Tracking validity. Language Testing, 21(4), 437 –465.
   Google Scholar
• Friend, R. (2002). Summing it up—Teaching summary writing to enhance science learning. The Science Teacher, 69(4), 40 –43.
   Google Scholar
• Garner, R., & McCaleb, J. L. (1985). Effects of text manipulations on quality of written summaries. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 10(2), 139 –149.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaskins, I. W., & Elliot, T. T. (1991). Implementing cognitive strategy instruction across the school: The benchmark manual for teachers. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
   Google Scholar
• Gebril, A. and Plakans, L. (2009). Investigating source use, discourse features, and process in integrated writing tests. Spaan Fellow Working Papers in Second or Foreign Language Assessment, 7, 47 –84.
   Google Scholar
• Guo, L. (2011). Product and process in TOEFL iBT independent and integrated writing tasks: A validation study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA.
   Google Scholar
• Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Happer, W. (2009). Global warming & climate change in perspective: CO2, scientific consensus, and climate models [Electronic Version]. Retrieved from http://www.capitalismmagazine.com/science/climate-science/5441-global-warming-amp-climate-change-in-perspective-co2-scientific-consensus-and-climate-models.html
   Google Scholar
• Hayes, J. R., & Nash, J. G. (1996). On the nature of planning in writing. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell ( Eds.), The Science of Writing: Theories, Methods, Individual Differences, and Applications ( pp. 29 –55). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Homburg, T. J., & Spaan, M. C. (1981). ESL reading proficiency assessment: Testing strategies. In M. Hines & W. Rutherford ( Eds.), On TESOL ’81 ( pp. 25–33). Washington, DC: TESOL.
   Google Scholar
• Hood, S. (2004). Managing attitude in undergraduate academic writing: A focus on the introductions to research reports. In L. Ravelli & R. Ellis ( Eds.), Analysing academic writing: Contextualised frameworks ( pp. 24 –44). London, UK: Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Horowitz, D. (1986). What professors actually want: Academic tasks for the ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 20(3), 445 –462.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janssen, D., van Waes, L., & Van den Bergh, H. (1996). Effects of thinking aloud on writing processes. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell ( Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences, and applications ( pp. 233–250). Mahwah, NJ.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Johns, A. M. (1988). Reading for summarizing: An approach to text orientation and processing. Reading in a Foreign Language, 4(2), 79 –90.
   Google Scholar
• Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1989). LISREL 7: A guide to the program and applications (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: SPSS.
   Google Scholar
• Kane, M. (1992). An argument-based approach to validation. Psychological Bulletin, 112(3), 527 –535.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kasper, L. F. (1997). Assessing the metacognitive growth of ESL student writers. TESL-EJ, 3(1).
   Google Scholar
• Keck, C. (2006). The use of paraphrase in summary writing: A comparison of L1 and L2 writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15(4), 261 –278.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kintsch, E. (1990). Macroprocesses and microprocesses in development of summarization skill. Cognition and Instruction, 7(3), 161 –195.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirkland, M. R., & Saunders, M. A. P. (1991). Maximizing student performance in summary writing: Managing cognitive load. TESOL Quarterly, 25(1), 105–121.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kline, P. (1994). An easy guide to factor analysis. London, UK: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kline, R. B. (2004). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Kluger, J. (2006). Earth at the tipping point: Global warming heats up [Electronic Version]. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1176980,00.html
   Google Scholar
• Koda, K. (2005). Insights into second language reading. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2008). Cognitive task complexity and written output in Italian and French as a foreign language. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(1), 48 –60.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kunnan, A. J. (1995). Test taker characteristics and test performance: A structural modeling approach. Cambridge, UK: University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate and Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kunnan, A. J. (1998). An introduction to structural equation modeling for language assessment research. Language Testing, 15(3), 295–332.
   Google Scholar
• Leki, I., & Carson, J. (1997). Completely different worlds: EAP and the writing experiences of ESL students in university courses. TESOL Quarterly, 31(1), 39–69.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewkowicz, J. (1994). Writing from sources: Does source material help or hinder students’ performance? In N. Bird ( Ed.), Language and Learning ( pp. 204 –217). Hong Kong: Institute of Language in Education.
   Google Scholar
• Maclellan, E. (1997). Reading to learn. Studies in Higher Education, 22(3), 277 –288.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mateos, M., Villalon, R., de Dios, M. J., & Martin, E. (2007). Reading and writing tasks on different university degree courses: What do the students say they do? Studies in Higher Education, 32(4), 489–450.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn ( Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13–104). New York: American Council on Education & Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• O’Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pecorari, D. (2003). Good and original: Plagiarism and patchwriting in academic second-language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12(4), 317–345.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pennycook, A. (1996). Borrowing other’s words: Texts, ownership, memory, and plagiarism. TESOL Quarterly, 30(2), 201–230.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phakiti, A. (2003a). A closer look at gender and strategy use in L2 reading. Language Learning, 53(4), 649 –702.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phakiti, A. (2003b). A closer look at the relationship of cognitive and metacognitive strategy use to EFL reading achievement test performance. Language Testing, 20(1), 26 –56.
   Google Scholar
• Phakiti, A. (2008). Construct validation of Bachman and Palmer’s (1996) strategic competence model over time in EFL reading tests. Language Testing, 25(2), 237 –272.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plakans, L. (2008). Comparing composing processes in writing-only and reading-to-write test tasks. Assessing Writing, 13(2), 111 –129.
   Google Scholar
• Plakans, L. (2009a). Discourse synthesis in integrated second language writing assessment. Language Testing, 26(4), 561 –587.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plakans, L. (2009b). The role of reading strategies in integrated L2 writing tasks. Journal of English for Academic Purpose, 8(4), 252 –266.
   Google Scholar
• Plakans, L. M., & Gebril, A. (2012). A close investigation into source use in L2 integrated writing tasks. Assessing Writing, 17(1), 18 –34.
   Google Scholar
• Purpura, J. E. (1997). An analysis of the relationships between test takers’ cognitive and metacognitive strategy use and second language test performance. Language Learning, 47(2), 289–325.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Purpura, J. E. (1998). Investigating the effects of strategy use and second language test performance with high- and low-ability test takers: A structural equation modeling approach. Language Testing, 15(3), 333–379.
   Google Scholar
• Purpura, J. E. (1999). Learner strategy use and performance on language tests: A structural equation modeling approach. Cambridge: University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate and Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Raimes, A. (1987). Language proficiency, writing ability, and composing strategies: A study of ESL college student writers. Language Learning, 37(3), 439–468.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Read, J. (1990). Providing relevant content in an EAP writing test. English for Specific Purposes, 9(2), 109–121.
   Google Scholar
• Sasaki, M. (1996). Second language proficiency, foreign language aptitude, and intelligence: quantitative and qualitative analyses. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Sasaki, M. (2000). Toward an empirical model of EFL writing processes: An exploratory study. Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(3), 259–291.
   Google Scholar
• Shi, L. (2004). Textual borrowing in second-language writing. Written Communication, 21(2), 171–200.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spack, R. (1988). Initiating students into the academic discourse community: How far should we go? TESOL Quarterly, 22(1), 29 –51.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spivey, N. (1984). Discourse synthesis: Constructing texts in reading and writing Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
   Google Scholar
• Spivey, N. (1990). Transforming texts: Constructive processes in reading and writing. Written Communication, 7(2), 256–287.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spivey, N. (1997). The constructivist metaphor: Reading, writing, and the making of meaning. New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Spivey, N. N., & King, J. R. (1989). Readers as writers composing from sources. Reading Research Quarterly, 24(1), 7–26.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stevens, J. (1992). Applied multivariate statistics for the social science (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Sun, Y. C. (2009). Using a two-tier test in examining Taiwan graduate students’ perspectives on paraphrasing strategies. Asia Pacific Education Review, 10(3), 399 –408.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsai, C. H. L. (2004). Investigating the relationships between ESL writers’ strategy use and their second language writing ability. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia University, New York, NY.
   Google Scholar
• Van der Geest, T. (1996). Studying “real-life” writing processes: A proposal and an example. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell ( Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences, and applications ( pp. 309 –415). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Victori, M. (1999). An analysis of writing knowledge in EFL composing: A case study of two effective and two less effective writers. System, 27, 537 –555.
   Google Scholar
• Watanabe, Y. (2001). Read-to-write tasks for the assessment of second language academic writing skills: Investigating text features and rater reactions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, HI.
   Google Scholar
• Weigle, S. C. (1999). Investigating rater/prompt interactions in writing assessment: Quantitative and qualitative approaches. Assessing Writing, 6(2), 145–178.
   Google Scholar
• Weir, C. J. (2005). Language testing and validation: An evidence-based approach. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Wenden, A. L. (1991). Learner strategies for learner autonomy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Whalen, K., & Ménard, N. (1995). L1 and L2 writers’ strategic and linguistic knowledge: A model of multiple-level discourse. Language Learning, 45(3), 381.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolfersberger, M. A. (2008). Second language writing from sources: An ethnographic study of an argument essay task. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
   Google Scholar
• Xi, X. (2008). What and how much evidence do we need? Critical considerations in validating an automated scoring system. In C. A. Chapelle, Y.-R. Chung, & J. Xu ( Eds.), Towards adaptive CALL: Natural language processing for diagnostic language assessment ( pp. 102 –114). Ames, IA: Iowa State University.
   Google Scholar
• Yang, H.-C. (2009). Exploring the complexity of second language writers’ strategy use and performance on an integrated writing test through structural equation modeling and qualitative approaches. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Texas, Austin, TX.
   Google Scholar
• Yang, H.-C., & Plakans, L. (2012). Second language writers’ strategy use and performance on an integrated reading-listening-writing task. TESOL Quarterly, 46(1), 80 –103.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, L., & Shi, L. (2003). Exploring six MBA students’ summary writing by introspection. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2(3), 165–192.
   Google Scholar