Skip to main content

The academic writing of community college remedial students: Text and learner variables

Abstract

Community college remedial reading studentscomposed an informational report from sources,a task commonly assigned in higher educationthat integrally combines reading and writingprocesses. Productivity, use of source text,reproductions, accuracy, and inclusion of keyideas were analyzed as a function of twoexogenous variables, text density (high, low)and domain (health, business), and twoendogenous variables, prior knowledge andgeneral literacy skill. Text densityinteracted with literacy skill forproductivity, and with prior knowledge foraccuracy. Individuals with lower literacy orprior knowledge scores were at a disadvantagewith high but not low density source text. Domain affected productivity, use of source,and inclusion of key ideas: health text wasassociated with superior performance. Domaineffects may be explained by metacognitive ormotivational variables, or differences in thereadability of the source texts. The resultshave implications for instruction aimed atimproving community college students'preparedness for the academic demands of highereducation.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  • Adelman, C. (October 1995). 'The new college course map and transcript files: changes in course-taking and achievement 1972-1993', Technical Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, P.A. and Jetton, T.L. (1996). 'The role of importance and interest in the processing of text', Educational Psychology Review 8, 89-121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, P.A., Kulikowich, J.M. and Jetton, T.L. (1994). 'The role of subject-matter knowl-edge and interest in the processing of linear and nonlinear texts', Review of Educational Research 64, 201-252.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, P.A., Murphy, P.K. and Kilikowich, J.M. (1998). 'What responses to domain-specific analogy problems reveal about emerging competence: a new perspective on an old acquaintance', Journal of Educational Psychology 90, 397-406.

    Google Scholar 

  • Armbruster, B.B. (1984). 'The problem of "inconsiderate" text', in Duffy, G.G., Roehler, L.R. and Mason, J. (eds.), Comprehension Instruction. New York: Longman, pp. 202-217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumann, J.F. (1986). 'Effect of rewritten content textbook passages on middle grade students' comprehension of main ideas: making the inconsiderate considerate', Journal of Reading Behavior 18, 1-21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumann, J.F. and Serra, R. (1984). 'The frequency and placement of main ideas in children's social studies textbooks: a replication of Braddock's research on topic sentences', Journal of Reading Behavior 16, 27-40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, I. et al. (1989). 'Learning from social studies texts', Cognition and Instruction 6, 99-158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, I., McKeown, M. and Worthy, J. (1995). 'Giving a text voice can improve students' understanding', Reading Research Quarterly 30, 220-238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, I., McKeown, M.G., Hamilton, R.L. and Kucan, L. (1998). 'Getting at the meaning: how to help students unpack difficult text', American Educator 22, 66-71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bridgeman, B. and Carlson, S.B. (1985). 'Survey of academic writing tasks', Written Communication 1, 247-280.

    Google Scholar 

  • Britton, B.K., Van Dusen, L., Gulgoz, S. and Glynn, S. (1989). 'Instructional texts rewritten by five expert teams: revisions and retention improvements', Journal of Educational Psychology 81, 226-239.

    Google Scholar 

  • Britton, B.K., Gulgoz, S. and Glynn, S. (1993). 'Impact of good and poor writing on learners: research and theory', in Britton, B.K., Woodward, A. and Binkley, M. (eds.), Learning from Textbooks: Theory and Practice. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 1-45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A.L. and Day, J.D. (1983). 'Macrorules for summarizing texts: the development of expertise', Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 22, 1-14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A.L., Day, J.D. and Jones, R.S. (1984). 'The development of plans for summarizing texts', Child Development 54, 968-979.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryant, B.R., Patton, J.R. and Dunn, C. (1991). Scholastic Abilities Test for Adults. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chall, J.S. and Jacobs, V.A. (1983). 'Writing and reading in the elementary grades: develop-mental trends among low SES children. Language Arts 60, 617-626.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiesi, H., Spilich, G.J. and Voss, J.F. (1979). 'Acquisition of domain-related information in relation to high and low domain knowledge', Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 18, 257-274.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, A.M. and Brawer, F.B. (1996). The American Community College,3rd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conoley, J.C. and Impara, J.C. (eds.). (1995). The 12th Mental Measurements Yearbook. Lincoln, NB: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements, University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dochy, F. and Alexander, P. (1995). 'Mapping prior knowledge: a framework for discussion among researchers', European Journal of the Psychology of Education 10, 225-242.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dochy, F., Segers, M. and Buehl, M.M. (1999). 'The relation between assessment practices and outcomes of studies: the case of research on prior knowledge', Review of Educational Research 69, 145-186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duffy, T.M. (1992). 'What makes a difference in instruction?', in Sticht, T., Beeler, M. and McDonald, B. (eds.), The Intergenerational Transfer of Cognitive Skills: Vol. I. Programs, Policies and Research Issues. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, pp. 61-83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duffy, T.M., Higgins, L., Mehlenbacher, B., Cochran, C., Wallace, D., Hill, C., Haugen, D., McCaffrey, M., Burnett, R., Sloane, S. and Smith, S. (1989). 'Models for the design of text', Reading Research Quarterly 24, 434-457.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzgerald, J. and Shanahan, T. (2000). 'Reading and writing relations and their development', Educational Psychologist 35, 39-50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, S.R., Saul, E.U. and Cote, N. (1995). 'Paragraphing, reader, and task effects on discourse comprehension', Discourse Processes 20, 273-305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregg, N., Sigalas, S.A., Hoy, C., Wisenbacker, J. and McKinley, C. (1996). 'Sense of audi-ence and the adult writer: a study across competence levels', Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal 8, 121-137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grubb, W.N. and Associates (1999). Honored but Invisible: An Inside Look at Teaching in Community Colleges. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hare, V.C., Rabinowitz, M. and Schieble, K.M. (1989). 'Text effects on main idea compre-hension', Reading Research Quarterly 24, 72-88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, E.R. and Speece, D.L. (1998). 'Reciprocal learning goes to college: effects for post-secondary students at risk for academic failure', Journal of Educational Psychology 90, 670-681.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johns, A.M. (1985). 'Summary protocols of "unprepared" and "adept" university students: replications and distortions of the original', Language Learning 35, 495-517.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, M.L. (1985). 'The composing process of college students writing from sources', Written Communication 2, 434-456.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kieras, D.E. (1980). 'Initial mention as a signal to thematic content in technical passages', Memory and Cognition 8, 345-353.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kincaid, J.P., Fishburne, R., Rogers, R.L. and Chissom, B.S. (1975). Derivation of New Read-ability Formulas (Automated Readability Index, Fog Count, and Flesch Reading Ease formula) for Navy Enlisted Personnel. Branch Report 8-75. Millington, TN: Chief of Naval Training.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kieras, D.E. (1985). 'Thematic processes in the comprehension of technical prose', in Britton, B.K. and Black, J.B. (eds.), Understanding Expository Text: A Theoretical Handbook for Analyzing Explanatory Text. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 89-107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A Paradigm for Cognition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kintsch, W. et al. (1975). 'Comprehension and recall of text as a function of content variables', Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 14, 196-214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kintsch, W. and van Dijk, T.A. (1978). 'Toward a model of discourse comprehension and production', Psychological Review 85, 363-394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klare, G.R. (1988). 'The formative years', in Zakaluk, B.L. and Samuels, S.J. (eds.), Read-ability: Its Past, Present and Future. Newark, DE: International Reading Association, pp. 13-34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langer, J.A. (1980). 'Relation between levels of prior knowledge and the organization of recall', in Kamil, M.L. and Moe, A.J. (eds.), Perspectives on Reading Research and Instruction. Clemson, NC: National Reading Conference, pp. 28-33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lenski, S.D. (1998). 'Strategic knowledge when reading in order to write', Reading Psychology 19, 287-315.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loban, W. (1976). Language Development. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorch, R.F. and Lorch, E.P. (1986). 'On-line processing of summary and importance signals in reading', Discourse Processes 9, 489-496.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGrath, D. and Spear, M.B. (1991). The Academic Crisis of the Community College.Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNamara, D.S., Kintsch, E., Songer, N.B. and Kintsch, W. (1996). 'Are good texts always better?: text coherence, background knowledge, and levels of understanding in learning from text', Cognition and Instruction 14, 1-43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Microsoft Word 97. (1997). Microsoft Corporation, <http://www.microsoft.com>.

  • Mutnick, D. (1996). Writing in an Alien World: Basic Writing and the Struggle for Equality in Higher Education. Portsmouth, NJ: Boynton Cook.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, N. and Calfee, R.C. (eds.). (1998). The Reading-writing Connection: The 97th Year-book of the National Society for the Study of Education Part II. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Packer, A. (1989, Nov.-Dec.). 'Preparing workforce 2000', Human Capital, 34-38.

  • Pajares, F., Miller, M.D. and Johnson, M.L. (1999). 'Gender differences in writing self-beliefs of elementary school students', Journal of Educational Psychology 91, 50-61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressley, M., El-Dinary, P.B., Gaskins, I., Schuder, T., Bergman, J.L., Almasi, J. and Brown, R. (1992). 'Beyond direct explanation: transactional instruction of reading comprehension strategies', Elementary School Journal 92, 511-554.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rachman, D.J., Mescon, M.H., Bovee, C.L. and Thill, J.V. (1996). Business Today 8th ed. New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Readence, J.E., Bean, T.W. and Baldwin, R.S. (1995). Content Area Literacy: An Integrated Approach fifth edition. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall Hunt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scanlan, C.L., Spearman, C.B. and Sheldon, R.L. (1995). Egan's Fundamentals of Respiratory Care 6th ed. St. Louis: Mosby.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schraw, G., Wade, S.E. and Kardash, C.A.M. (1993). 'Interactive effects of text-based and task-based importance on learning from text', Journal of Educational Psychology 85, 652-661.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumacher, G.M. and Nash, J.G. (1991). 'Conceptualizing and measuring knowledge change due to writing', Research in the Teaching of English 25, 67-96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selinger, B.M. (1995). 'Summarizing text: developmental students demonstrate a successful method', Journal of Developmental Education 19, 14-16, 18, 20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shanahan, T. and Lomax, R.G. (1986). 'An analysis and comparison of theoretical models of the reading-writing relationship', Journal of Educational Psychology 78(2), 116-123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spires, H.A. and Donley, J. (1998). 'Prior knowledge activation: inducing engagement with informational texts', Journal of Educational Psychology 90, 249-260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spivey, N.N. (1991). 'The shaping of meaning: options in writing the comparison', Research in the Teaching of English 25, 390-418.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spivey, N.N. and King, J.R. (1989). 'Readers as writers composing from sources', Reading Research Quarterly 24, 7-29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternglass, M.S. (1997). Time to Know Them: A Longitudinal Study of Writing and Learning at the College Level. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tierney, R.J. and Shanahan, T. (1991). 'Research on the reading-writing relationship: interac-tions, transactions, and outcomes', in Barr, R., Kamil, M.L., Mosenthal, P.B. and Pearson, P. D. ( e ds. ), Handbook of Reading Reading Research Vol. 2. New York: Longman, pp. 246-280.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vacca, R.T. and Vacca, J.L. (1999). Content Area Reading: Literacy and Learning Across the Curriculum 6th edition. New York: Longman/Addison Wessley.

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Geest, T. (1996). 'Studying "real-life" writing processes: a proposal and an example', in Levy, C.M. and Ransdell, S. (eds.), The Science of Writing: Theories, Methods, Individual Differences, and Applications. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 309-322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wade, S.E., Buxton, W.M. and Kelly, M. (1999). 'Using think-alouds to examine reader-text interest', Reading Research Quarterly 34, 194-216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wade, S.E. and Trathen, W. (1989). 'Effect of self-selected study methods on learning', Journal of Educational Psychology 81, 40-47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Werther, W.B. and Davis, K. (1996). Human Resources and Personnel Management 5th ed. New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitaker, K. (1996). Comprehensive Perinatal and Pediatric Respiratory Care 2nd ed. Albany, NY: Delmar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winograd, P.N. (1984). 'Strategic difficulties in summarizing texts', Reading Research Quarterly 19, 404-425.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dolores Perin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Perin, D., Keselman, A. & Monopoli, M. The academic writing of community college remedial students: Text and learner variables. Higher Education 45, 19–42 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021237532056

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021237532056

  • community college students
  • composing from sources
  • informational writing
  • reading and writing processes
  • remedial students