Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Exploring Students’ Integrated Reading and Summary Writing Processes Through an Online System

探究線上系統中學生整合閱讀和摘要寫作過程

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
English Teaching & Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

English-as-a-Foreign-Language (EFL) students often encounter difficulties with English writing due to limited vocabulary and an inability to integrate reading and writing skills effectively. Summary writing is one of the most effective means of integrating English reading comprehension while developing writing skills. However, writing summaries requires unobservable cognitive processes of identifying main ideas in order to convert paragraphs into concise statements. This study contributes to the existing literature on summary writing by developing and testing an online summary writing system designed to support the cognitive processes of integrated reading and writing. The findings highlight the key factors and functions involved in the design system to support summary construction. The online writing system comprises Selecting, Organizing, and Integrating (SOI) modules with the functions of Vocabulary Helper, Online Dictionary, and Reference tools. The participants were 20 students in a reading class who were recruited to receive 11 weeks of English summary writing instruction. The data included pre- and post-TOEIC reading test scores, summary writing efficiency, action logs in the online system, and responses to a questionnaire. The results showed that the system functioned to scaffold students’ integrated reading and writing with the SOI functions, providing them with opportunities for repeated review of the selected vocabulary, main ideas, and important sentences. These were the fundamental factors in facilitating summary writing processes. Pedagogical implications are discussed.

摘要

以英語為外語的學習者在面對英語寫作時常常會遇到單字量不足或無法有效率地整合閱讀和寫作。摘要寫作就是在養成寫作技巧時整合閱讀理解資訊最有效率的方法之一。然而摘要寫作需經歷將文章要旨精要的陳述的認知歷程。此篇研究開發了一個線上摘要寫作系統以探究其對學習者在整合閱讀及寫作時的認知歷程及影響, 以期對現有文獻有所貢獻。此研究結果點出主要支援摘要寫作的關鍵和系統功能。參與者是二十位參與閱讀課程的學生並進行了11週的英語摘要寫作教學。研究資料包含前後、測的多益閱讀成績, 摘要寫作的成效, 在線上系統的行為紀錄和問卷調查結果。研究結果顯示這個系統的選擇、組織及整合模式的設計對建立學生的閱讀整合及寫作能力有正面的成效, 並且提供他們機會去重複複習精選單字、大意和重要的句子以協助摘要寫作的歷程。

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Anderson, V., & Hidi, S. (1989). Teaching students to summarize. Educational Leadership, 46(4), 26–28.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Baba, K. (2009). Aspects of lexical proficiency in writing summaries in a foreign language. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18, 191–208.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Baleghizadeh, S., & Babapur, M. (2011). The effect of summary writing on reading comprehension and recall of EFL students. New England Reading Association Journal, 47(1), 44–57.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Belcher, D., & Connor, U. (2001). Reflections on multi-literate lives. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Blachowicz, C., & Ogle, D. (2017). Reading comprehension: Strategies for independent learners. New York: Guilford Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Brown, A. L., & Day, J. D. (1983). Macrorules for summarizing texts: the development of exercise. Journal of Memory and Language, 22, 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Brown, C., Snodgrass, T., Kemper, S. J., Herman, R., & Covington, M. A. (2008). Automatic measurement of propositional idea density from part-of-speech tagging. Behavior Research Methods, 40(2), 540–545.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Caccamise, D. (2011). Improved reading comprehension by writing. Perspectives on Language Learning and Education, 18(1), 27–31.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Chen, Y. S., & Su, S. W. (2011). A genre-based approach to teaching EFL summary writing. ELT Journal, 66(2), 184–192.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Chen, N. S., Kinshuk, Wei, C. W., & Chen, H. J. (2008). Mining e-Learning domain concept map from academic articles. Computer & Education, 50, 1009–1021.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Dole, J. A., Duffy, G. G., Roehler, L. R., & Pearson, P. D. (1991). Moving from the old to the new: research on reading comprehension instruction. Review of Educational Research, 61, 239–264.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Duke, N. K., & Pearson, P. D. (2002). Effective practices for developing reading comprehension. In A. E. Farstrup & S. J. Samuels (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (pp. 205–242). Newark: International Reading Association.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Elish-Piper, L., & Hinrichs, S. R. (2010). Writing summaries of expository text using the magnet summary strategy. In B. Moss & D. Lapp (Eds.), Teaching new literacies in grades 4–6 (pp. 327–339). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Fiorella, L., & Mayer, R. E. (2015). Learning as a generative activity: Eight learning strategies that promote understanding. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Franco, C. D. P. (2008). Using wiki-based peer-correction to develop writing skills of Brazilian EFL learners. Novitas-ROYAL, 2(1), 49–59.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Frey, N., Fisher, D., & Hernandez, T. (2003). What’s the gist? Summary writing for struggling adolescent writers. Voices from the Middle, 11(2), 43–49.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Friend, R. (2001). Effects of strategy instruction on summary writing of college students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26(1), 3–24.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Gajria, M., & Jitendra, A. K. (2016). Effective strategies for developing reading comprehension. In S. Rachel & J. Malatesha (Eds.), Interventions in learning disabilities (pp. 119–137). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Garner, R. (1982). Efficient text summarization: cost and benefit. Journal of Educational Research, 75(5), 275–279.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Godwin-Jones, B. (2008). Emerging technologies: web-writing 2.0: enabling, documenting, and assessing writing online. Language Learning & Technology, 12(2), 7–13.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Grabe, W., & Zhang, C. (2013). Reading and writing together: a critical component of English for academic purposes teaching and learning. TESOL Journal, 4(1), 9–24.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Graham, S., & Harris, K. (2005). Improving the writing performance of young struggling writers. The Journal of Special Education, 39(1), 19–33.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Graham, S., & Herbert, M. A. (2010). Writing to read: Evidence for how writing can improve reading. A Carnegie Corporation time to act report. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Hare, V. C., & Borchardt, K. M. (1984). Direct instruction of summarization skills. Reading Research Quarterly, 20(1), 62–78.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Hedgcock, J. S., & Ferris, D. R. (2009). Teaching readers of English: Students, texts, and contexts. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Janopoulos, M. (1986). The relationship of pleasure reading and second language writing proficiency. TESOL Quarterly, 20(4), 763–768.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Jitendra, A. K., & Gajria, M. (2011). Main idea and summarization instruction to improve reading comprehension. In R. E. O’Connor & P. F. Vadasy (Eds.), Handbook of reading interventions (pp. 198–219). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Karbalaei, A., & Rajyashree, K. S. (2010). The impact of summarization strategy training on university ESL learners’ reading comprehension. The International Journal of Language Society and Culture, 30, 41–53.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Kiewra, K. A. (2005). Learn how to study and SOAR to success. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Kim, S. A. (2001). Characteristics of EFL readers’ summary writing: a study with Korean university students. Foreign Language Annals, 34(6), 569–581.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Kintsch, W., & van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85, 363–394.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Kobayashi, M. (2002). Method effects on reading comprehension test performance: text organization and response format. Language Testing, 19(2), 193–220.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Lee, S., & Hsu, Y. (2009). Determining the crucial characteristics of extensive reading programs: the impact of extensive reading on EFL writing. The International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 5(1), 12–20.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Lee, S., & Krashen, S. (2002). Predictors of success in writing in English as a foreign language: reading, revision behavior, apprehension, and writing. College Student Journal, 36(4), 532–543.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Lund, A. (2008). Wikis: a collective approach to language production. ReCALL, 20(1), 35–54.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Ma, Y. H., & Lin, W. Y. (2015). A study on the relationship between English reading comprehension and English vocabulary knowledge. Education Research International, 2015, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/209154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Mak, B., & Coniam, D. (2008). Using wikis to enhance and develop writing skills among secondary school students in Hong Kong. System, 36(3), 437–455.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D. J., & Pollock, J. E. (2001). Classroom instruction that works. Alexandria: ASCD.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Marzec-Stawiarska, M. (2016). The influence of summary writing on the development of reading skills in a foreign language. System, 59, 90–99.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Mayer, R. E. (1996). Learning strategies for making sense out of expository text: the SOI model for guiding three cognitive processes in knowledge construction. Educational Psychology Review, 8(4), 357–371.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Mayer, R. E. (2014). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 43–71). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Mermelstein, A. D. (2015). Improving EFL learners’ writing through enhanced extensive reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 27(2), 182–198.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Miyazoe, T., & Anderson, T. (2010). Empirical research on learners’ perceptions: Interaction equivalency theorem in blended learning. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning (EURODL). Retrieved from http://www.eurodl.org/materials/contrib/2010/Miyazoe_Anderson.pdf.

  46. Nelson, J. R., Smith, D. J., & Dodd, J. M. (1992). The effects of a summary skills strategy to students identified as learning disabled on their comprehension of science text. Education and Treatment of Children, 15(3), 228–243.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Neufeld, P. (2005). Comprehension instruction in content area classes. The Reading Teacher, 59, 302–312.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Spack, R. (1997). The acquisition of academic literacy in a second language: a longitudinal case study. Written Communication, 14(1), 3–62.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Taylor, K. (1986). Summary writing by young children. Reading Research Quarterly, 21(2), 193–208.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Tiffin-Richards, S. P., & Schroeder, S. (2015). The component processes of reading comprehension in adolescents. Learning and Individual Differences, 42, 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Turgut, Y. (2009). EFL learners’ experience of online writing by PBWiki. In G. Siemens, & C. Fulford (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications (pp. 3838–3847).

  53. van den Broek, P., Lynch, J. S., Naslund, J., Ievers-Landis, C. E., & Verduin, K. (2003). The development of comprehension of main ideas in narratives: evidence from the selection of titles. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 707–718.

    Google Scholar 

  54. van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Williams, J. P. (1988). Identifying main ideas: a basic aspect of reading comprehension. Topics in Language Disorders, 8(3), 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Wittrock, M. C. (1974). Learning as a generative process. Educational Psychologist, 11(2), 87–95.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Wittrock, M. C. (1989). Generative processes of comprehension. Educational Psychologist, 24(4), 345–376.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Yang, Y. F. (2006). Reading strategies or comprehension monitoring strategies? Reading Psychology, 27(4), 313–343.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Yang, Y. F. (2014). Preparing language teachers for blended teaching of summary writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 27(3), 185–206.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Yang, Y. F. (2016). Transforming and constructing academic knowledge through online peer feedback in summary writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(4), 683–702.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Yu, G. (2007). Students’ voices in the evaluation of their written summaries: empowerment and democracy for test takers? Language Testing, 24(4), 539–572.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Yu, G. (2008). Reading to summarize in English and Chinese: A tale of two languages? Language Testing, 25, 521–551.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This project is supported by the Mistry of Science and Technology under grant number 106-2628-S-224-001-MY3.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Applied Foreign Languages, National Yunlin University of Science and Technology, Douliu, Yunlin, Taiwan

    Hui-Chin Yeh

  2. Department of Applied Foreign Languages, National Formosa University, Huwei, Yunlin, Taiwan

    Shih-Hsien Yang

  3. Taichung City Chang Yi High School, Taichung, Taiwan

    Gia-Ling Chen

Authors
  1. Hui-Chin Yeh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shih-Hsien Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gia-Ling Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shih-Hsien Yang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yeh, HC., Yang, SH. & Chen, GL. Exploring Students’ Integrated Reading and Summary Writing Processes Through an Online System. English Teaching & Learning 44, 21–43 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42321-019-00026-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42321-019-00026-1

Keywords

關鍵詞

Search

Navigation