Temporal Management of the Writing Process: Effects of Genre and Organizing Constraints in Grades 5, 7, and 9

http://wcx.sagepub.com/Communication

Written

http://wcx.sagepub.com/content/31/3/251The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1177/0741088314536361 2014 31: 251Written Communication

Lucie Beauvais, Monik Favart, Jean-Michel Passerault and Caroline BeauvaisOrganizing Constraints in Grades 5, 7, and 9

Temporal Management of the Writing Process: Effects of Genre and

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism

can be found at:Written CommunicationAdditional services and information for

http://wcx.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://wcx.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://wcx.sagepub.com/content/31/3/251.refs.htmlCitations:

at UNIV OF OKLAHOMA on August 22, 2014wcx.sagepub.comDownloaded from at UNIV OF OKLAHOMA on August 22, 2014wcx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

What is This?

- Jul 15, 2014Version of Record >>

at UNIV OF OKLAHOMA on August 22, 2014wcx.sagepub.comDownloaded from at UNIV OF OKLAHOMA on August 22, 2014wcx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

Written Communication2014, Vol. 31(3) 251 279

2014 SAGE PublicationsReprints and permissions:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0741088314536361

wcx.sagepub.com

Article

Temporal Management of the Writing Process: Effects of Genre and Organizing Constraints in Grades 5, 7, and 9

Lucie Beauvais1, Monik Favart2, Jean-Michel Passerault2, and Caroline Beauvais3

AbstractWe investigated changes across grades in the cognitive demands associated with the organizing subprocess of writing. A total of 85 fifth (age M = 10.8), 88 seventh (age M = 12.9), and 79 ninth (age M = 14.6) graders composed either a procedural text or an expository description on a digital tablet, on the basis of a scrambled ideas paradigm. The demands of organizing were measured in terms of time management (the time spent pausing and transcribing during text production). Our results suggest a developmental change in the on-line management of the organizing subprocess. Findings indicate that only pupils from ninth grade onward adapt their writing behavior to match the task demands. Results are discussed in light of Berninger and Swansons developmental model of writing.

1Laboratoire dEtude des Mcanismes Cognitifs, Universit Lyon2, Bron cedex, France2Centre de Recherches sur la Cognition et lApprentissage (CeRCA), Universit de Poitiers & CNRS, Maison des Sciences de lHomme et de la Socit, Poitiers Cedex, France3Laboratoire Paragraphe, Universit Paris8, Saint-Denis Cedex, France

Corresponding Author:Lucie Beauvais, Laboratoire Etude des Mcanismes Cognitifs EA 3082 - Universit Lyon2, LabEx Cortex ANR-11-LABX-0042, 5 avenue Pierre Mends France, 69676 Bron cedex, France. Email: [email protected]

536361WCXXXX10.1177/0741088314536361Written CommunicationBeauvais et al.research-article2014

at UNIV OF OKLAHOMA on August 22, 2014wcx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

252 Written Communication 31(3)

KeywordsWriting acquisition, text structuring, Genre, on-line measures, off-line measures

Becoming an expert in text production is a long process that requires mastery of several writing processes. At least two types of cognitive processes can be distinguished: the high-level processes and the low-level processes, each of them placing cognitive demands on the writers limited working memory capacity during writing (Flower & Hayes, 1981; Kellogg, 2001; McCutchen, 1996; Olive, Kellogg, & Piolat, 2008). Whether or not working memory becomes overloaded during writing depends mainly on the degree of writing expertise that has been acquired and precisely on how the writing processes are managed. With development and practice, the low-level processes (grapho-motor execution, linguistic formulation) gradually become largely automa-tized, freeing up cognitive resources that can be assigned to higher-level processes, namely planning and reviewing (Berninger & Swanson, 1994; McCutchen, 1996, 2000). This automatization allows the high-level processes to be implemented in parallel with the low-level ones. Among the several writ-ing processes, organizing ideas (a subcomponent of planning, Hayes & Flower, 1980) is regarded as particularly central in order to produce meaning-ful content. Most of the time, ideas retrieved in long-term memory need to be organized before being written (Flower & Hayes, 1981), so the addressee will be able to process the text as a single, understandable unit (Bamberg, 1984; Spencer & Fitzgerald, 1993; Todd, Khongput, & Darasawang, 2007).

The present study investigated changes across grades in the cognitive demands associated with the organizing subprocess of writing. As different genres make different demands on organizing (Kellogg, 2001), we compared the effect of two genres, procedural and expository description, on the changes in the temporal management of organizing in fifth, seventh, and ninth graders. After describing the place of the organizing subprocess in models of writing acquisition, we discuss the influence of genre knowledge on the amount of organizing the writer has to carry out. Finally, we describe the study we conducted comparing the two above-mentioned genres.

Organizing can be regarded as a late-developing subprocess that is learning-dependent (Berninger, Fller, & Whitaker, 1996). According to the French national curriculum for secondary schools (2008), students must master the organizing subprocess if they are to attain writing expertise at the end of compulsory education (Socle commun des connaissances et des comp-tences, 2006). The organizing subprocess can be operated on different ways according to the writers expertise. Indeed, models of writing acquisition


Beauvais et al. 253

highlight two different strategies, distinguishing between novices and experts in their ability to manage organizing. The beginning writers use the novice knowledge-telling strategy attesting of the mastery of the translating process in fourth, fifth, and sixth graders (i.e., intermediate graders referring to Phase 2 in Berninger & Swansons, 1994, model). This consists of setting down ideas in the order in which they are retrieved from long-term memory, rather than in any purposeful way. They thus avoid the strategic organization of ideas (McCutchen, 1988; Schneuwly, 1988). As a result, texts produced using this strategy consists of the juxtaposition of sentences, without logical links between them. Sentences are mainly linked by additive connectives such as and (for a precise description of the impact of the use of knowledge-telling strategy on text structuring, see Hayes, 2011).

With development and practice, junior high students (Grades 7, 8, and 9, referring to phase 3 in Berninger & Swansons, 1994, model) are able to implement a more sophisticated knowledge-transforming strategy. This involves an interaction between the content retrieved from long-term mem-ory and the rhetorical constraints of writing. This more expert strategy requires knowing not only what to say but also how to say it, taking into account the representation of the audience. Knowledge-transformers are able to engage in a more mature form of planning. The use of this strategy allows content to be reorganized in order to achieve both the communicative goals (Burtis, Bereiter, Scardamalia, & Tetroe, 1983) and the rhetorical goals spe-cific to a particular genre. Access to this complex strategy is regarded as gradual and related to the writers level of writing acquisition, and is fully mastered only by the age of 15 or 16 years in the argumentative genre (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1987). In this case, the resulting texts involve the use of various cohesive devices to link sentences and paragraphs. However, writers as young as 13 years can produce coherent products in less sophisti-cated genres, by implementing prototypical text structures to manage both content and rhetorical constraints (Bereiter, Burtis, & Scardamalia, 1988). Knowledge-transforming strategy can be accompanied by the implementa-tion of the conceptual components before the writing time, that is to say generating and organizing ideas, before embarking on the translating process. This preplanning activity allows reducing the cognitive demands of the orga-nizing subprocess during the course of writing, thereby facilitating overall writing management (Berninger & Swanson, 1994).

To go further, the benefits of a preplanning activity on text quality depend on the writing expertise. This has been at the center of two studies that inves-tigated the development of this preplanning activity: Whitaker, Berninger, Johnson, and Swanson (1994) in intermediate grades (4, 5 and 6) and Berninger, Whitaker, Feng, Swanson, and Abbott (1996) in junior high grades



(7, 8 and 9). In both studies, participants were asked to perform a writing task whose aim was to compose a letter describing what school is like in the USA to a foreign pupil. This writing task was divided into three separated tasks, each one referring to a cognitive process described by Hayes and Flower (1980). First, children were asked to plan their text during 5 minutes (i.e., preplanning).The purpose of these plans was to organize text content before writing it down, in order to achieve the goals the students had set themselves; second, they were instructed to compose their text during 5 minutes (i.e., translating); finally, 7 minutes were given to the pupils so that they could revise their text. In order to assess level of skill development across the writ-ing processes, the authors designed a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (least mature) to 5 (most mature) for each cognitive process.

Correlations between preplanning and translating scores indicated that pre-planning efficiently improved the quality of the text organization process from seventh grade onward. However, the intermediate students preplanning did not lead them to implement text organization in a particularly expert way. This dif-ference observed between intermediate and junior high grades in planning matu-rity resulted in differences in text quality: coherent and cohesive texts matched with clear communicative goals versus poorly elaborated texts (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1987; Berninger & Swanson, 1994). In addition to observing posi-tive impact of the preplanning strategy on the final product, it could be expected an impact on the temporal management of composition. However, the on-line dimension was not taken into account in these experiments.

More recently, technological advances have provided new knowledge about the development of writing expertise taking into account the temporal aspect of the writing process. For instance, an interesting method for studying the acquisition of writing expertise has consisted of investigated pauses dur-ing writing. Described as moments of scribal inactivity (Matsuhashi, 1981), pauses are regarded as visible indicators of processing complexity and its associated demands (Alamargot, Plane, Lambert, & Chesnet, 2010; Chanquoy, Foulin, & Fayol, 1990; Foulin, 1995; Schilperoord, 2001). They occur when the writer is unable to continue writing while performing high-level processes (Foulin, 1995). Using this methodology, Alamargot et al. (2010) showed that writing pause duration gradually decreased with the development of writing expertise. According to the authors, this reduction reflected acceleration in both the low- and the high-level processes involved in writing, suggesting a gradual mastery of the management of writing pro-cesses. If pauses in production are a fruitful way to investigate the develop-ment of writing, to our knowledge, data are lacking concerning the cognitive management of the organizing subprocess across grades.


Beauvais et al. 255

In addition to the acquisition of writing skills, the impact of genre knowl-edge also has to be considered (Fitzgerald & Teasley, 1986), as it greatly influ-ences the writers implementation of the organizing subprocess (Fayol, 1991). More precisely, discourse schemata guide the organization of ideas. They can therefore improve text production, leading to better organized written texts (McCutchen, 1986; Wright & Rosenberg, 1993). As the writer is freed from the constraints of organizing, the cognitive demands associated with writing are reduced (McCutchen, 1988). The most striking and frequently mentioned example in writing acquisition is that of the narrative genre, with children from about 10 years onward having some sense of the typical order of ideas in story-telling (Adam, 1984; Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1982; Fayol, 1985; Mandler & Johnson, 1977). When producing a narrative text, the implementation of the knowledge-telling strategy may prove to be entirely adequate and lead to well-structured products, even in young writers (Favart & Coirier, 2006). This is also the case for the procedural genre, in which the strict chronology of subgoals and actions dictates the way in which ideas need to be organized (Adam & Petitjean, 1989; Dixon, 1987). For instance, this kind of schema has to be respected when a writer has to produce a recipe or users instructions, which guide the reader in the achievement of the task (Ganier, 2006).

When there are no such schemata to steer the writer in the right direction, the content is harder to generate and has to be organized to match the rhetori-cal aims of the relevant genre. This is true, for instance, when writing an argumentative text, whose purpose is to convince an addressee. To achieve this goal, the writer has to implement an expert knowledge-transforming strategy, taking the addressees potential point of view into consideration (Kulikowich, Mason, & Brown, 2008). This leads him or her to use counter-arguments (Golder & Favart, 2003) and engage in complex negotiation operations (Golder, 1996; Pouit, 2000), so as to produce relevant and effi-cient content. As a result, composing an argumentative text places heavy cog-nitive demands on the writers executive abilities (Ferretti, MacArthur, & Dowdy, 2000). For these reasons, students only become capable of efficiently using a knowledge-transforming strategy at around 15 or 16 years (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1987), and writing an argumentative text is therefore extremely difficult to master before this age. This difficulty was highlighted by Matsuhashi (1981), who investigated the management of composition via pausing while writing. She showed that pause duration varies according to genre to produce with longer pausing while composing an argumentative text than they do while composing a narrative one. Assuming that pause duration is an indicator of task complexity, results showed that trying to convince an addressee is more difficult than telling a story.



Moreover, it should be noted that acquisition of genres is obviously related to instruction. In the French educational system, as soon as Grade 3, pupils are familiarized with narrative and procedural genres through several exercises. For instance, they can be asked to categorize several short texts, according to their aim (tell a story, explain the different steps to realize a task) and by detecting the specific characteristics related to their structure. Moreover, teachers often propose scrambled text exercises that consist in organizing ideas in order to compose a coherent text. By doing these sorts of tasks, children develop knowledge of the textual constituents and their pos-sible ordering for each studied genre. It is not until Grade 9 that students are explicitly taught to produce real argumentative texts. They are encouraged to defend their opinion using arguments and to propose counterarguments in order to anticipate counterobjection that an addressee might have. The argu-mentative genre is considered more difficult to produce due to the absence of a prototypical schema that pupils can follow to organize their ideas (Golder & Favart, 2003). For this reason, it is taught much later than the other text types.

Using scrambled ideas (Coirier, Favart, & Chanquoy, 2002), Favart and Coirier (2006) investigated genre knowledge in testing the effect of different genres on text organizing. Third, fifth, seventh, and ninth graders were pro-vided with three sets of 11 ideas (i.e., 11 sentences expressing 11 different ideas) corresponding to three genres: procedural (a recipe to be followed), narrative (a story of a main character), and expository description (describing the characteristics of an animal and then requiring the writer to make an argu-ment to sustain the position that this animal must be protected). For each set, participants were instructed to reorganize the 11 ideas and write them down so as to compose a coherent text. Texts were scored to assess the ability to reorganize the ideas according to an optimum order based on structuring rules. Writing fluency was also assessed. This measure, estimated by calcu-lating the total number of words written per minute of production, is an indi-cator of the overall efficiency of the writing processes (McCutchen, 1988): an increase in the number of words produced by minute expressed an increase in the writing efficiency. Organizing in the procedural genre was fully mastered by fifth graders, but the expository descriptive set proved far more difficult to organize, whatever the grade. Scores were intermediate for narrative orga-nizing. Writing fluency increased steadily across grades. Despite the absence of any effect of genre on writing fluency, the authors discussed results in light of the planning strategies implemented by students. They concluded that the more the text structure constrained composition, the more it facilitated con-tent organization, thus reducing the cognitive demands associated with the organizing subprocess.


Beauvais et al. 257

The Present Study: Hypotheses

The main purpose of the present study was to directly assess the effect of genre on the cognitive demands of organizing in the acquisition of writing. No such assessment was undertaken in the study conducted by Favart and Coirier (2006). To this end, we tested the effect of organizing demands on efficiency of text structuring (i.e., ordering scores and diversity of connec-tives) and on the temporal management of the writing process (i.e., preplan-ning activity, time spent pausing while writing, and time spent transcribing), comparing Grades 5, 7, and 9 and crossing two experimental factors: genre and conceptual ordering.

To test conceptual ordering, we used Favart and Coiriers (2006) scram-bled ideas paradigm. Alongside the scrambled ideas condition, we introduced a control condition, where the same 11 ideas were provided in the right order (i.e., ordered ideas condition), so as to exempt participants from organizing. It should be borne in mind that the present task was at a considerable remove from a standard writing task, but only this type of paradigm would allow us to isolate organizing from the other writing processes.

As organizing is a high-level subprocess that can be operated either during production pauses or in parallel with the low level processes (transcription), the cognitive demands of organizing while writing were assessed by measur-ing the percentage of time spent pausing and transcribing. The greater the difficulty a writer has organizing a text, the greater the proportion of time he or she will spend on pausing (see Matsuhashi, 1981, for expert writers and Alamargot et al., 2010, for a developmental case study).

In regard to grade level, we expected to observe a decrease among Grades 5, 7, and 9 in the percentage of time spent pausing while organizing, reflect-ing more expert management of the writing processes across grades (Alamargot et al., 2010; Berninger & Swanson, 1994). Indeed, only seventh and ninth graders should be able to undertake planning in an efficient and strategic manner (Bereiter et al., 1988; Berninger et al., 1996; Berninger & Swanson, 1994). This increasing efficiency should be accompanied by the production of well-structured texts (greater ordering scores and a wider diversity of connectives).

To test the effect of genre, we compared procedural versus expository descriptive structures (this last genre including an argumentative reasoning). We argued that organizing the expository description would be highly resource-demanding, requiring the implementation of an organizing strategy comparable to the knowledge-transforming strategy. Conversely, the proce-dural genre, based on a strict consecution of subgoals and actions, would be satisfactorily organized simply by implementing an organizing strategy



comparable to the knowledge-telling strategy (Favart & Coirier, 2006). It can thus be expected a greater proportion of time spent on pausing in the exposi-tory description than in the procedural text.

Organizing in the procedural genre is mastered as early as the fifth grade (Favart & Coirier, 2006). We should not observe particular evolution in struc-turing this genre (i.e., ordering scores and diversity of connectives) among Grades 5, 7, and 9. In the same way, the proportion of time spent on pausing would either decrease between Grades 5 and 7 (Berninger et al., 1996; Berninger & Swanson, 1994; Whitaker et al., 1994), or else remain stable throughout, from Grades 5 to 9 (Favart & Coirier, 2006). Conversely, in the expository description, organizing starts to improve only between Grades 7 and 9 (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1987). Thus, only ninth graders should be able to perform the knowledge-transforming strategy needed to organize content appropriately, allowing better ordering scores and a greater diversity in the use of connectives. A decrease in percentage of time spent pausing would be most noticeable between Grades 7 and 9 (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1987).

A second goal was to examine whether organizing demands entailed the implementation of a preplanning strategy. This strategy would result in an increase in the percentage of time that elapsed before the students put pen to paper.

We expected to observe an increase in preplanning duration with grade level, especially from seventh graders onward (Berninger et al., 1996). This should be particularly noticeable when the task entailed content organization (i.e., in the scrambled ideas condition), and also when writing the expository description.

Finally, we wished to find out whether the implementation of such a pre-planning strategy does indeed lessen the cognitive cost of writing. In other words, would spending more time on preplanning reduce the amount of time spent pausing in the course of composition? We predicted that the more time students spent preplanning, the less time they would spend pausing. Moreover, we expected that the more time students spent preplanning, the more they would use diversified connectives.

Method

Participants

The sample included a total of 252 students drawn from Grades 5, 7, and 9. We selected participants for whom handwriting would not be a burden. Thus, in line with previous studies (Berninger et al., 1992; Berninger & Swanson, 1994), participants were drawn from fifth graders onward.


Beauvais et al. 259

They attended elementary schools and junior high schools in Angoulme, Barbezieux, and Chalais (Charente, France), all located in areas of intermediate socioeconomic status. The classes were chosen at random from a list of public elementary schools. Only the children with parental consent participated in the study. For inclusion in the data analysis, children needed to meet the following criteria: They needed to be French native speakers without any reported history of learning disabilities or writing and reading difficulties by the teacher. Children who repeated a year were also excluded from the analyses. The num-ber of participants and their mean ages are shown in Table 1.

Material

The material for the procedural genre and expository description was drawn from Favart and Coiriers (2006) study. For each genre, 11 preselected ideas were provided to participants (see Appendix A). They were asked to compose a coherent text. The characteristics of the paradigm were as follows:

1. Because all the ideas were provided to participants, an equivalent content was ensured for each text structure, in each genre.

2. The paradigm targeted the organizing subprocess of planning. Text generation was greatly reduced: The only requirement was to trans-late cohesion cues (connectives and/or punctuation marks) in order to express relationships between the ideas.

These characteristics allowed us to formulate precise hypotheses as regards organizing.

For both genres, the 11 ideas were presented either in the right order (con-trol condition) or in random order (scrambled ideas condition). In each of the two sets, each idea supplied a specific piece of information about one particu-lar topic: either modeling dough (the recipe to be followed) in the proce-dural genre or the wildcat in the expository description. Moreover, each idea was introduced with the same lexical item: You must introduced each

Table 1. Numbers of Participants, Mean Ages, and Standard Deviations at Each Grade Level.

Grade level Number Age M (years; months) Range SD

5 85 (51 girls, 34 boys) 10; 8 10; 3 to 11; 4 0.37 88 (43 girls, 45 boys) 12; 9 12; 6 to 13; 4 0.39 79 (41 girls, 38 boys) 14; 6 13; 9 to 15; 4 0.4



action in the procedural set, while The wildcat was the repeated topic of the expository descriptive set. For both genres, the sets of ideas had the same constraints: (a) an introductory statement, (b) three clusters of three ideas matching the macrostructural components, and (c) a concluding statement. In the procedural set, the first cluster presented the ingredients to be included to recipe, the second set explained the procedure to be followed to realize the modeling dough, and the third one described the final steps to model and to bake the chosen shapes. In the expository description, the first cluster con-tained a physical description of the animal, the second one details about its habits, and the third cluster arguments supporting the thesis that the wildcats diet means it is not a pest. We chose the term expository description since this last set includes both descriptive elements and argumentative reasoning that consists of defending and supporting a point of view that the wildcat must be protected. More precisely, referring to Adam and Petitjeans (1989) work about descriptive texts, an optimal order can logically be set up. According to these authors, it would not be logical to describe the way of life of an animal before presenting its physical appearance in a descriptive text. Moreover, it is also habitual to start description according to specificity of information: from the most general to the least. According to this principle, one can expect that writers describe general ideas about the cat before men-tioning precise information about it inside the two clusters. The final cluster had been elaborated to require the writers an argumentative reasoning to sus-tain the position that the wild cat must be protected. It has been demonstrated that the optimum order is progressively reached from Grade 5 to university students (Coirier et al., 2002).

To sum up, in the scrambled ideas condition, an optimum order could be set up complying with precise rules.

- For the procedural genre, the ideas within each cluster had to be orga-nized according a strict consecution of subgoals and actions.

- For the expository description, the ideas had to be logically organized, from the less specific to the more specific inside each cluster to con-vince the reader that the wildcat must be protected.

On the basis of this predefined optimum order, an ordering score was calcu-lated, with a maximum score of 12 points (see Appendix B).

Writing Task

The writing assignment was to compose a well-organized text based on the set of 11 ideas. Participants performed the task in one of the two organizing


Beauvais et al. 261

conditions. In the control (ordered) condition, all 11 ideas were provided in the right order, while in the scrambled condition 9 of the 11 ideas were provided in random order. For this scrambled condition, (a) all 11 ideas were first randomly presented at the top of the page, then (b) on the same page, both the introduc-tory and concluding statements were printed in bold in their proper places: the introductory statement above the 9 scrambled ideas, in order to give partici-pants an idea of the genre they had to write in, and the concluding statement below these ideas. In both conditions, the writing task was performed on the same page, underneath the set of ideas. There was no time limit for the task.

Procedure

The experimental procedure was implemented in a single session and involved two steps: The first step was designed to identify individual handwriting pauses, so that they could be distinguished from organizing pauses. Participants were instructed to perform a handwriting task on a sheet of paper laid on top of a digi-tal tablet (Wacom tablet, Eye and Pen software; Chesnet & Alamargot, 2005). This task consisted of writing out their own first name and surname over and over again for 2 minutes, at their usual speed and in their usual handwriting. When they had finished, participants had to press the end button on the tablet with their pen to terminate the recording. On the basis of this handwriting task, an individual pause threshold was calculated for each participant, equal to the mean handwriting pause duration (see Table 2 for details about pause threshold). Only pauses above this threshold were retained for analysis, these being the only ones related to organizing (as opposed to handwriting abilities).

The second step, which consisted of the actual writing task, was also car-ried out individually. Each participant composed one text on the digital tablet in one of the four writing conditions: 2 organizing conditions (ordered ideas condition vs. scrambled ideas condition) 2 genres (procedural vs. exposi-tory description).

In the ordered ideas condition, participants were instructed to read the 11 ideas printed at the top of the page through carefully and to rewrite these

Table 2. Means and Standard Deviations of the Pause Threshold (in ms) According to Grade Level.

Grade level M SD Range

5 339 106 154 to 5947 247 84 130 to 6329 204 48 115 to 338



ideas, linking them with cohesion cues in order to compose a coherent and understandable text. Participants could take as much time as they needed and were simply requested to press the end button on the digital tablet to termi-nate the recording.

In the scrambled ideas condition, the writing assignment was the same as in the control condition, except that participants were also asked to rearrange the nine scrambled ideas to compose their text, without forgetting to rewrite the introductory and concluding statements.

Once the texts had been composed, two sets of dependent variables were analyzed:

Text Structuring Efficiency

- In the scrambled ideas condition, an ordering score was calculated on the basis of the optimum order, with a maximum score of 12 points.

- The diversity of connectives was calculated by measuring the number of different connectives used. More precisely and referring to Olive, Favart, Beauvais, and Beauvais (2009), we measured the diversity of connectives according to the following categories: chronological (e.g., then), temporal (e.g., when), goal (e.g., for), causal (e.g., because), consequence (e.g., therefore), adversative (e.g., but), concessive (e.g., however), and restrictive connectives (e.g., although). This qualitative analysis gives information on the efficiency of students to express rela-tions between ideas, reflecting an efficient conceptual organization.

Temporal Management of the Writing Process

- The percentage of time spent preplanning was calculated by dividing the preplanning time by the total composition time (including preplan-ning) 100.

- The percentage of time spent pausing while writing was calculated by dividing the time spent pausing by the total composition time (exclud-ing preplanning) 100.

- The percentage of time spent transcribing while writing was calculated by dividing the time spent transcribing by the total composition time (excluding preplanning) 100.

Results

The main purpose of the present study was to assess the cognitive demands associated with the organizing subprocess and to test the effect of these organizing demands on the temporal management of the writing process in


Beauvais et al. 263

Grades 5, 7, and 9, comparing two different genres (procedural and exposi-tory description).

Accordingly, two sets of analyses were conducted. First, we examined text structuring efficiency (ordering scores and use of connectives) and the man-agement of the writing process (time spent preplanning, pausing, and tran-scribing). Statistical analyses were performed with Statistica 7 software. For all variables, we first performed a normality test and a variance homogeneity test (Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Brown-Forsythe tests, respectively). Due to nonnormality of the distributions and unequal variance between groups, Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests were performed to compare the means of the ordering scores, the diversity of connectives used and the time spent preplanning. For the remaining dependent variables (time spent paus-ing and time spent transcribing), we ran an ANOVA, with grade level (5, 7, 9), genre (procedural, expository description), and organizing condition (ordered ideas, scrambled ideas) as between-participants factors. Scheff post hoc comparisons were performed at an alpha level of .05.

The second set of analyses was designed to examine the efficiency of a preplanning process in reducing conceptual constraints during writing. We therefore probed the relationship between the amount of time spent preplan-ning and the amount of time spent pausing while organizing, using Pearsons correlation coefficient. Moreover, in the framework of the capacity theory, the implementation of a preplanning strategy could free up cognitive resources that could be dedicated to express the relationship between ideas via the use of connectives. To test this hypothesis, we examined the relation-ship between the amount of time spent preplanning and the diversity of con-nectives using Pearsons correlation coefficient.

Text Structuring Efficiency

Ordering Scores (Scrambled Ideas Condition). First, the nonparametric analyses revealed that groups did not differ significantly according to the grade level, H(2) = 3.94, ns. Moreover, means differed significantly in terms of genre, U = 313.50, p < .0001, with higher ordering scores in the procedural genre than in the expository description, at each grade level (see Table 3).

Diversity of Connectives. Nonparametric tests were conducted on the number of different connectives used in the final text (see Table 4). The diversity of connectives was affected by grade, H(2) = 24.02, p < .0001. Students in Grade 5 used as many different connectives as students in Grade 7. But stu-dents in Grade 9 produced significantly a wider variety of connectives than fifth and seventh graders. The diversity of connectives was affected by Genre,



U = 3201.50, p < .0001: Connectives were more diversified in the procedural genre than in the expository description. This result on text structure supports the idea that the strong chronological order of actions allows children to bet-ter manage text generation and to use more specific linguistic markers. This specificity is observed via the use of temporal connectives (e.g., when), chronological connectives (e.g., then, after), and goal connectives (e.g., in order to).

The Kruskal-Wallis test conducted for each genre also revealed that the effect of grade level on the diversity of connectives was attested only in proce-dural genre, and only in the scrambled condition, H(2) = 13.99, p < .001: Ninth

Table 3. Means, Standard Deviations, Minimums, and Maximums of Conceptual Ordering Scores According to Grade Level and Genre in the Scrambled Condition (Maximum Score = 12).

Procedural Expository description

M SD Min Max M SD Min Max

Grade 5 10.5 2.3 3 12 6.3 3.1 1 12Grade 7 11 2.2 7 12 5.2 2.9 0 10Grade 9 11.6 0.8 10 12 8.1 1.6 6 12

Table 4. Means, Standard Deviations, Minimums, and Maximums of the Number of Different Connectives According to Grade Level, Genre, and Organizing Condition.

Grade 5 Grade 7 Grade 9

P ED P ED P ED

Ordered M 2.6 1.5 3.1 1.6 4.1 2.4SD 1.2 0.6 1.2 0.5 1.5 1.5Min 1 1 1 1 2 1Max 5 3 5 2 7 7

Scrambled M 2.7 1.6 2.6 2.4 4.2 2.3SD 1.3 0.6 1.2 1.0 1.3 0.7Min 1 1 1 1 1 1Max 5 3 5 5 6 4

Note: ED = expository description; P = procedural.


Beauvais et al. 265

graders used a higher number of different connectives than did fifth and sev-enth graders. No difference was observed between Grades 5 and 7. In the expository description, no difference was found between grades. Finally, diver-sity of connectives was not affected by organizing condition, U = 6294, ns.

Temporal Management of the Writing Process

The task involved reordering ideas and linking them with cohesion markers. No time limit was imposed to the students. We performed an analysis (Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests) that indicated that the mean total time spent on task significantly decreased from Grade 5 (M = 9.1 min, SD = 3.8) to Grade 7 (M = 6.1 min, SD = 1.8), H(2) = 60.23, p < .0001. No differ-ence in time spent on task was observed between Grades 7 and 9 (M = 6.1 min, SD = 1.8). This time also differed significantly according to the ordering condition (U = 4327, p < .0001): Students dedicated more time when ideas needed to be reordered than when ideas were already in the right order (respectively, M = 8.1 min, SD = 2.9, M = 6.3 min, SD = 2.9). Accordingly, to control individual differences in text production time, we calculated the per-centage of time spent preplanning, pausing, and transcribing on the total time spent on task as denominator.

Percentage of Time Spent Preplanning. Nonparametric tests were conducted on the percentage of time spent preplanning (see Figure 1). The percentage of time spent preplanning was affected by grade, H(2) = 40.07, p < .0001: Ninth graders spent more time preplanning than students in Grades 5 and 7 (M = 9.1, SD = 10.2; M = 4.1, SD = 8; M = 2.3, SD = 3.7, respectively). No differ-ence was observed between fifth and seventh graders. This pattern was observed whatever the organizing condition. Moreover, students spent sig-nificantly more time preplanning in the scrambled ideas condition (M = 8.2, SD = 10.7) compared to the ordered condition (M = 2.1, SD = 2.3), U = 5976, p < .001. However, genre did not affect this dependent measure, U = 7802, ns.

Finally, for each grade, we compared the percentage of time spent pre-planning according to the organizing condition. Results revealed that in Grade 9 only, students spent more time preplanning in the scrambled ideas condition (M = 15.37, SD = 11.35) compared to the ordering one (M = 3.04, SD = 2.64; U = 118, p < .05).

Percentage of Time Spent Pausing. As we thought that organizing ideas in the scrambled condition might affect the temporal management of writing, we computed Pearsons correlation coefficient between the ordering scores and the percentage of time spent pausing, for each genre and each grade level. No



significant correlation was observed. For this reason, subsequent analyses did not take ordering scores as a covariate and the two organizing conditions (ordered ideas, scrambled ideas) were compared using an ANOVA.

A Grade Level (5, 7, 9) Genre (procedural, expository description) Organizing Condition (ordered ideas, scrambled ideas) ANOVA was con-ducted on the percentage of time spent pausing (see Figure 2).

The effect of grade level was significant, F(2, 240) = 12.21, p < .0001, p2 = .09: Fifth graders spent a greater proportion of time pausing while writ-ing than seventh (p < .05) and ninth graders (p < .0001; M = 53, SD = 10; M = 49, SD = 9; M = 46, SD = 9, respectively). However, the percentage of time spent pausing did not differ between Grades 7 and 9. No effect of genre was observed, F < 1, ns.

Organizing condition had a significant impact on the percentage of time spent pausing, F(1, 240) = 11.33, p < .001, p2 = .04. It was higher in the scrambled ideas condition (M = 51, SD = 11) than in the ordered ideas one (M = 47, SD = 8). The interaction between grade level and organizing condi-tion was also significant, F(2, 240) = 3.91, p = .02, p2 = .03. The percentage of time spent pausing in the scrambled ideas condition was lower in Grade 9 (M = 46, SD = 10) than in Grades 5 (M = 55, SD = 11, p < .01) and 7 (M = 53, SD = 10, p < .05). However, no such difference was found in the control

Figure 1. Mean percentages (and standard deviations) of time spent preplanning according to grade level, genre, and organizing condition.Note: ED = expository description; P = procedural.


Beauvais et al. 267

condition. Moreover, whereas no effect of organizing condition was observed on the time spent pausing in Grades 5 and 9, seventh graders spent longer pausing in the scrambled condition (M = 53, SD = 10) than in the ordered one (M = 45, SD = 8, p < .01). No other interactions were significant (Fs < 1, ns).

Percentage of Time Spent Transcribing. A Grade Level (5, 7, 9) Genre (proce-dural, expository description) Organizing Condition (ordered ideas, scram-bled ideas) ANOVA was conducted on the percentage of time spent transcribing (see Figure 3).

Grade level had a significant effect on this variable, F(2, 240) = 10.05, p < .0001, p2 = .08. It did not differ between Grades 5 and 9, but seventh graders spent a greater proportion of time on transcribing than fifth (p < .0001) and ninth graders (p < .05; M = 48, SD = 9; M = 43, SD = 10; M = 44, SD = 10, respectively). Organizing condition had a significant effect on the percentage of time spent transcribing, F(1, 240) = 98.86, p < .0001, p2 = .29. It was higher when ideas were presented in the right order (M = 50, SD = 9) rather than when students had to organize them (M = 40, SD = 8). No other effects were found (p > .05).

Figure 2. Mean percentages (and standard deviations) of time spent pausing while writing according to grade level, genre, and organizing condition.Note: ED = expository description; P = procedural.



Correlations Between the Percentage of Time Spent Preplanning and the Temporal Management of the Writing Process

Table 5 shows the correlations between the percentage of time spent preplan-ning and the percentage of time spent pausing.

In the ordered ideas condition, no significant correlations were observed between these two variables. Conversely, in the scrambled ideas condition, for each genre and at each grade level, the percentage of time spent preplan-ning was negatively correlated with the percentage of time spent pausing.

In other words, the relationship between the percentage of time spent pre-planning and the percentage of time spent pausing suggests that the longer the students spend preplanning, the lighter are the cognitive demands associ-ated with organizing during writing.

Correlations between the percentage of time spent preplanning and the diversity of connectives used were performed (see Table 6). In the ordered ideas condition, no significant correlations were observed between these two variables. In the scrambled ideas condition, no significant correlations were observed, except for the ninth graders in the expository description.

Figure 3. Mean percentages (and standard deviations) of time spent transcribing while writing according to grade level, genre, and organizing condition.Note: ED = expository description; P = procedural.


Beauvais et al. 269

Discussion

The main purpose of the present study was to investigate changes across grades in the organizing subprocess of planning. To this end, we tested the effect of organizing demands on the efficiency of text structuring (i.e., ordering scores and diversity of connectives) and on the temporal management of the writing process (i.e., percentages of time spent preplanning, pausing, and transcribing). We compared Grades 5, 7, and 9, crossing two experimental factors: genre and conceptual ordering. Participants performed either a procedural or an exposi-tory descriptive task on a digital tablet, on the basis of a scrambled text para-digm (organizing condition) that was compared with a control condition (ideas provided in the right order; see Appendix C for a summary of the main results).

Focusing on temporal management of the writing process in the course of writing, taken together, the temporal indicators (percentages of time spent preplanning, pausing, and transcribing) showed an evolution in the strategy used to organize the ideas across grades. In fact, pupils used different strate-gies according to their expertise level when the task required the organizing

Table 5. Correlations (Pearsons Correlation Coefficient) Between the Percentage of Time Spent Preplanning and the Percentage of Time Spent Pausing, According to Grade Level, Genre, and Organizing Condition.


P ED P ED P ED

Ordered .30 .27 .25 .27 .05 .24Scrambled .61* .84* .71* .58* .80* .71*

Note: ED = expository description; P = procedural.*p < .05.

Table 6. Correlations (Pearson Correlation Coefficient) Between the Percentage of Time Spent Preplanning and the Diversity of Connectives, According to Grade Level and Genre and Organizing Condition.


P ED P ED P ED

Ordered .40 .32 .15 .22 .10 .01Scrambled .42 .10 .35 .18 .04 .49*

Note: ED = expository description; P = procedural.*p < .05.



subprocess. Considering the percentages of time spent pausing in the scram-bled condition, fifth and seventh graders did not differ. However, a decrease took place in Grade 9. No such decrease in the percentage of time spent pausing was observed with grade level in the control condition, when no organizing demands were imposed. Moreover, and as expected, the percentage of time spent preplanning increased when the task consisted of reordering ideas. But only ninth graders spent more time preplanning in the scrambled than in the order condition. During this preplanning activity, ninth graders presu-mably read the ideas and began to organize them before embarking on the actual writing. These two different strategies observed in Grades 5, 7, and 9 distinguish between novices and experts in their ability to manage organizing in the course of writing. This is in line with the knowledge-telling and knowl-edge-transforming strategies proposed by Bereiter and Scardamalia (1987). While for fifth and seventh graders the organizing strategy consists of organiz-ing the ideas after beginning to write (corresponding to a knowledge-telling strategy), ninth graders implement a more sophisticated knowledge- transforming strategy that consists of organizing the ideas both before and after beginning to write. It should be mentioned that the instructions we gave to students did not include any information about how to proceed to achieve the task. Despite this absence of instructions, the pupils actually use different organizing strategies depending on their degree of expertise. According to Bereiter and Scardamalia (1987), the implementation of such a complex knowledge-transforming strategy allows taking into account the representa-tion of the audience. As a result, texts produced using this strategy contain various cohesive devices to link sentences and paragraphs, which is not the case when students use the knowledge telling strategy (in Grade 5 and 7). To go further, we could also hypothesized that this preplanning activity imple-mented in Grade 9 allows reducing the cognitive demands of the organizing subprocess during the course of writing, thereby decreasing the percentage of time spent pausing. Our findings suggest that, conversely to the ninth grad-ers, students in Grades 5 and 7 did not change their writing behavior accord-ing to the demands of the task: the percentage of time they spent preplanning did not differ between the two organizing conditions. We highlighted this strategic adaptation only in Grade 9.

These results described above slightly modify the developmental pattern proposed by Berninger and Swanson (1994). These authors assumed that orga-nizing would improve mainly between Grades 5 and 7, thus marking a break between intermediate and junior high students. But when organizing demands were imposed (i.e., in the scrambled ideas condition), we found that this break emerged between Grades 7 and 9 in terms of percentage of time spent preplan-ning and pausing. Thus, when the task was highly resource-demanding, sev-enth graders did not demonstrate the ability to meet the task constraints, and


Beauvais et al. 271

their writing behavior was no different from that of the fifth graders. Contrary to Berninger and Swansons (1994) assertion, it proved difficult for the seventh graders to implement organizing strategies that were as sophisticated as those adopted by the ninth graders. This result should however be considered with care since these two experiments rely on different measures and different sam-ples. Other studies need to be carried out before generalizing.

Finally, for the child, the apparatus we used is very close to a standard written composition task that could be asked by a teacher in the classroom. We actually use lined paper and an inking pen that is similar to a regular pen. One should keep in mind that this different developmental pattern we observed could be partially due to the difference in the writing medium we used compared to Berninger and Swansons study. Several studies have already examined the way the writing medium (and particularly the use of writing technologies) could have an impact on the processes involved in the writing activity. For example, Haas (1989) conducted three experiments: She reported differences in the amount of planning and the way this process was managed between pen and paper and word processing conditions (for an example of a study comparing the performance of students reading texts dis-played on a computer and on a printed hard copy, see Haas & Hayes, 1986). A research literature is emerging concerning how the stylus tablet could affect the writing activity. This effect on the management of the writing pro-cessing and their cognitive demands during writing would be worth studied.

Concerning the impact of grade level on texts structuring efficiency, it had no effect on the ordering scores. In the absence of grade effect, the validity of this exercise could be called into question. However, instead of being high-lighted by the ordering scores, the difficulty linked to the organizing demands was reflected in the diversity of connectives, which increased in Grade 9. Two possible explanations of this increase of the use of different connectives can be given. A first interpretation consists of asserting that as the number of words in the mental lexicon increases with age, ninth graders simply have more avail-able linguistic devices to precisely express the relationship between ideas. However, some French studies have demonstrated an early knowledge and an early oral appropriate use of the different connectives, long before Grade 5 (see, e.g., Mouchon, Fayol, & Gombert, 1991). Consequently, an alternative interpretation of this result is possible: It is likely that ninth graders anticipated the potential reader and understood the need to express the different types of relations between ideas. They anticipated the need for organizing the ideas of the forthcoming text during the preplanning activity, allowing devoting resources to the other writing processes during composition. Accordingly, more resources would have been available for translating, to express the different types of relations between ideas. However, and contrary to our expectations, more preplanning did not lead to more coherent products, as the diversity in the



use of connectives was not linked to the percentage of time spent preplanning (except in Grade 9, for the expository description).

Genre, however, had no effect on either the percentage of time spent pausing or the percentage spent transcribing. This rather surprising result contradicts Matsuhashis (1981) finding of genre-related differences in adults writing management. However, this absence of replication could be explained by the difference between the proposed tasks. Whereas Matsuhashis task involved the entire writing processes, the task we proposed was intended to involve only organizing subprocess. Isolating organizing from the other writing processes might lighten the overall demands of writing. The obtained results however corroborate previous findings by Favart and Coirier (2006) and Olive et al. (2009), who failed to observe any effect of genre on writing fluency, as indica-tor of writing efficiency. In our study, at each grade, ordering scores were higher in the procedural genre than in the expository description. In the proce-dural genre, we observed some ceiling effects in performances (on average, 60% of the Grade 5, 75% of the Grade 7, and 80% of the Grade 9 children obtained the maximum score of 12). This result is not surprising since accord-ing to the French national curriculum, this genre is to be mastered as soon as Grade 5. A greater diversity in the use of connectives in the procedural genre compared to the expository description gives an additional proof of its better mastering. In the expository description, organizing proved to be highly resource-demanding, the scores showing that optimal ordering did not reach a 100% score even in Grade 9 (on average, 5% of the Grade 9 children obtained the maximum score of 12). These results thereby confirm our expectations and Favart and Coiriers (2006) findings, using the same paradigm: When texts imply high-level structuring (description) and argumentative reasoning (expos-itory), organizing is especially problematic to manage (Ferretti et al., 2000).

It is important to rise a methodological point that could reduce the scope of our findings. In the present study, we investigated the effects of genre manipulating two sets of ideas (a procedural and an expository description text). It should be mentioned that our conclusions are made on the basis of only one example of each genre rather than different sets of a same genre. More systematic studies manipulating different examples of a same genre need to be carried out.

In terms of education, to what extent do these results address issues related to writing acquisition? They attest that the organizing activity is demanding and can hence have an impact on text quality. Thus, several interventions could be recommended to enhance the structuring of produced texts. A way to reduce the demands linked to organizing could consist in encouraging stu-dents to develop writing strategy whose purpose is to focus effort on single processplanning in our caseat given time. For instance, Kellogg (1988)


Beauvais et al. 273

showed benefit of ideas organizing before embarking in writing on adults text quality. If some writers spontaneously adapt their writing strategy as a func-tion of cognitive demands and spend time planning before writing, others, mainly beginning writers, need explicit instruction to implement an efficient preplanning activity. Skilled writers are probably able to analyze the goal of the writing task and to organize appropriately the content during that prewrit-ing pause. This ability to exert deliberate control on writing management is based on metaknowledge that beginning writers do not necessarily have. While the French national curriculum for secondary schools (2008) stresses the need to teach drafting before writing at every grade level, nothing is said about how to make this process an effective one. Students need to be taught explicitly how to take benefit from the preplanning activity. However, data are lacking concerning this benefit in children, in terms of text quality, specifi-cally text structuring and management of the writing process.

Thus, our findings now need to be taken a step further, by investigating the beneficial effect of organizing on the temporal management of the writing process in the context of standard writing tasks. As mentioned above, if the scrambled-text paradigm is appropriate to target the organizing subprocess of planning, it should be kept in mind that this task is far from being an ecologi-cal task. Actually, the paradigm we used in this study gives little room for ideas generation and content formulation. In an ecological writing task that requires the writer to generate ideas on the basis of its own knowledge, the strategy used to generate ideas may not correspond to those imposed by the scrambled text paradigm. Indeed, rather than operating generating and orga-nizing in two distinct stages, the writer can make these two subprocesses interact. In this case, one may argue that the way organizing is implemented in this experiment is artificial. Studies have already investigated the on-line management of the writing process in the course of writing in more ecologi-cal tasks (e.g., Beauvais, Olive, & Passerault, 2011; Levy & Ransdell, 1996). However, these studies did not especially focus on the way organizing is managed during the course of writing. Future research should be conducted to explore the management of this organizing subprocess taking into account the entire set of the writing processes implied in text production.

Appendix A

Control Condition (11 Ordered Ideas)Procedural Set: Modeling Dough

1. You must model dough animals.2. You must take salt.



3. You must add flour. 4. You must use water. 5. You must mix the ingredients with your fingers. 6. You must shape a dough ball. 7. You must make several pieces. 8. You must model the chosen shapes. 9. You must bake in the oven.10. You must decorate with paint.11. You must put the shaped objects in a safe place.

Expository Descriptive Set: The Wildcat

1. The wildcat is not a very well-known animal. 2. The wildcat has grey fur. 3. The wildcat has a bushy tail. 4. The wildcat is slightly bigger than the domestic cat. 5. The wildcat is mainly active at night. 6. The wildcat is to be found in the woods. 7. The wildcat is a shy animal. 8. The wildcat is blamed for eating rabbits and hens. 9. The wildcat is not a pest.10. The wildcat only eats small rodents.11. The wildcat is a species that must be protected.

Appendix B

Criteria Used to Calculate the Ordering Scores: Coding the Clustering and Location of Ideas

Clustering of ideas (maximum clustering score = 6 points); 3 items together = 2 points, 2 items together = 1 point, none together = 0 points

Location of ideas (maximum location score = 6 points)3A in 1st to 5th location = 2 points3B between 3rd and 7th = 2 points3C between 6th and 9th = 2 points2A in 1st to 5th location = 1 point2B between 3rd and 7th = 1 point2C between 6th and 9th = 1 point


275

App

endi

x C

Sum

mar

y of

Mai

n O

btai

ned

Resu

lts A

nalys

is as

Fun

ctio

n of

Gra

de L

evel

(L)

, Gen

re (

G),

and

Org

aniz

ing

Cond

ition

(O)

Dep

ende

nt v

aria

ble

Tex

t st

ruct

urin

g ef

ficie

ncy

Tes

ts s

tatis

tics

Fact

ors

Effe

cts

Des

crip

tions

Ord

erin

g sc

ores

Kru

skal

-Wal

lisL

H(2

) =

3.9

4, n

s

M

ann-

Whi

tney

GU

= 3

13.5

0, p

< .0

001

P >

ED

Div

ersi

ty o

f con

nect

ives

Kru

skal

-Wal

lisL

H(2

) =

24.

02, p

< .0

001

9th

> 7

th =

5th

M

ann-

Whi

tney

GU

= 3

201.

50, p

< .0

001

P >

ED

O

U =

629

4, n

s

K

rusk

al-W

allis

Effe

ct o

f L in

scr

ambl

ed c

ondi

tion,

for

IH

(2)

= 1

3.99

, p 7

th =

5th

Tem

pora

l man

agem

ent

Perc

enta

ge o

f tim

e sp

ent

prep

lann

ing

Kru

skal

-Wal

lisL

H(2

) =

40.

07, p

< .0

001

9th

> 7

th =

5th

M

ann-

Whi

tney

GU

= 7

802,

ns

Man

n-W

hitn

eyO

U =

597

6, p

< .0

01O

rder

ed

Documents

Temporal Management of the Writing Process: Effects of Genre and Organizing Constraints in Grades 5, 7, and 9