File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: The effect of metalinguistic sentence combining on eighth-grade students’ understanding and written expression of comparison and contrast in science

TitleThe effect of metalinguistic sentence combining on eighth-grade students’ understanding and written expression of comparison and contrast in science
Authors
Issue Date2020
Citation
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 2020, v. 63, n. 9, p. 3068-3083 How to Cite?
AbstractPurpose: The purpose of this study was to examine whether sentence combining with an explicit metalinguistic approach in comparison to typical science instruction was effective in improving written expression and understanding of comparison/contrast in science for eighth-grade students who struggle with literacy. Method: Eighty-four eighth-grade students who struggle with literacy participated in this study. The experimental group (n = 36) received the writing intervention of metalinguistic sentence combining (MSC) during their science class for a total of 400 min (20 intervention sessions, 20 min each), while the comparison group (n = 48) participated in their typical science instruction. Total science instruction time was held constant for both groups. All students completed pretests and posttests to determine an increase in (a) syntactic factors of academic science text such as longer sentence length and use of syntactic forms of connectives, targeted connectives, left embeddedness, and agentless passive voice when responding to a science compare and contrast writing prompt; and (b) listing similarities and differences between two science concepts on a graphic organizer. Results: Treatment was effective in improving the experimental group’s score in listing similarities and differences between two science concepts on a graphic organizer. There were no significant differences between the two groups in their use of syntactic factors typical of academic text when responding to a science compare and contrast writing prompt. Conclusions: MSC was effective in improving the experimental student’s ability to demonstrate understanding of comparison and contrast in science. Modifications to the MSC intervention may yield better results in the experimental group’s posttreatment writing in future studies. Supplemental Material: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha. 12735950.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/307061
ISSN
2023 Impact Factor: 2.2
2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.827
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorTelesca, Lynne-
dc.contributor.authorEhren, Barbara J.-
dc.contributor.authorHahs-Vaughn, Debbie L.-
dc.contributor.authorZygouris-Coe, Vassiliki Vicky I.-
dc.contributor.authorKong, Anthony Pak Hin-
dc.date.accessioned2021-11-03T06:21:51Z-
dc.date.available2021-11-03T06:21:51Z-
dc.date.issued2020-
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 2020, v. 63, n. 9, p. 3068-3083-
dc.identifier.issn1092-4388-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/307061-
dc.description.abstractPurpose: The purpose of this study was to examine whether sentence combining with an explicit metalinguistic approach in comparison to typical science instruction was effective in improving written expression and understanding of comparison/contrast in science for eighth-grade students who struggle with literacy. Method: Eighty-four eighth-grade students who struggle with literacy participated in this study. The experimental group (n = 36) received the writing intervention of metalinguistic sentence combining (MSC) during their science class for a total of 400 min (20 intervention sessions, 20 min each), while the comparison group (n = 48) participated in their typical science instruction. Total science instruction time was held constant for both groups. All students completed pretests and posttests to determine an increase in (a) syntactic factors of academic science text such as longer sentence length and use of syntactic forms of connectives, targeted connectives, left embeddedness, and agentless passive voice when responding to a science compare and contrast writing prompt; and (b) listing similarities and differences between two science concepts on a graphic organizer. Results: Treatment was effective in improving the experimental group’s score in listing similarities and differences between two science concepts on a graphic organizer. There were no significant differences between the two groups in their use of syntactic factors typical of academic text when responding to a science compare and contrast writing prompt. Conclusions: MSC was effective in improving the experimental student’s ability to demonstrate understanding of comparison and contrast in science. Modifications to the MSC intervention may yield better results in the experimental group’s posttreatment writing in future studies. Supplemental Material: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha. 12735950.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research-
dc.titleThe effect of metalinguistic sentence combining on eighth-grade students’ understanding and written expression of comparison and contrast in science-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1044/2020_JSLHR-19-00086-
dc.identifier.pmid32757702-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85090919555-
dc.identifier.volume63-
dc.identifier.issue9-
dc.identifier.spage3068-
dc.identifier.epage3083-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000573495800016-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats