An official website of the United States government
Learning from multiple documents is an essential ability in today's society. This experimental study used concept network analysis to consider how reading prompts and post-reading generative learning tasks alter students' document integration performance. Undergraduates (N = 119) read three documents about Alzheimer's disease with one of two reading prompts (integrative purpose vs. detailed purpose) and then after reading completed a generative learning task (concept mapping vs. summary writing). Three days later they completed a delayed writing task and an inference verification test. Participants' written texts were converted to concept networks to evaluate conceptual level integration, including the quantity of integration (measured by the proportion of integrative links), the semantic quality of integration (measured by the similarity of integrative links), and the structural quality of integration (measured by comparing graph centrality). Results showed that the integrative purpose relative to the detailed purpose enhanced the quantity of integration but not the semantic and structural quality. Further, concept mapping relative to summary writing significantly improved the structural quality of integration. In addition, this study provides a new approach for evaluating different aspects of integration and contributes to multiple document comprehension literature from the perspective of concept network analysis.
more »
« less
The influence of pre-reading purpose and extra-textual networks with summary writing on multiple document concept network integration: a replication of Wei et al. (2024)
Abstract Theories and practices to enhance multiple document comprehension and integration are crucial in both personal and work contexts, especially with the proliferation of printed and online sources. This experimental investigation replicates and extends (Wei et al., Educational Technology Research and Development 72:661–685, 2024) to examine how multiple documents integration is influenced by reading purpose, summary writing, and extra-textual networks (pre-reading, Study 1, and post-writing, Study 2). In Study 1 (N = 102), participants were randomly assigned to a pre-reading purpose set by a prompt (integrative or detailed) and by a network (an integrative or else an intra-text network) and then read three documents about Alzheimer’s disease to complete a writing task with revision (but no feedback). Three days later, they completed a delayed writing task and an inference verification test. In Study 2 (N = 90), the same procedure was used except that the network was used as feedback after writing to support revision. Results from the two studies agree with the previous research that the quantity and structural quality of integration can be improved by external cues and by delayed repeated writing. This research further confirms an innovative approach for evaluating different aspects of knowledge integration and contributes to the literature from the concept network perspective as a measure and an intervention of multiple-text reading.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2215807
- PAR ID:
- 10596685
- Publisher / Repository:
- Springer Science + Business Media
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Educational technology research and development
- Volume:
- 73
- Issue:
- 4
- ISSN:
- 1042-1629
- Format(s):
- Medium: X Size: p. 2163-2188
- Size(s):
- p. 2163-2188
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Student Experiences With Peer Review and Revision for Writing-to-Learn in a Chemistry Course ContextPeer review is useful for providing students with formative feedback, yet it is used less frequently in STEM classrooms and for supporting writing-to-learn (WTL). While research indicates the benefits of incorporating peer review into classrooms, less research is focused on students’ perceptions thereof. Such research is important as it speaks to the mechanisms whereby peer review can support learning. This study examines students’ self-reported approaches to and perceptions of peer review and revision associated with WTL assignments implemented in an organic chemistry course. Students responded to a survey covering how they approached peer review and revision and the benefits they perceived from participating in each. Findings indicate that the assignment materials guided students’ approaches during both peer review and revision. Furthermore, students described various ways both receiving feedback from their peers and reading their peers’ drafts were beneficial, but primarily connected their revisions to receiving feedback.more » « less
-
Writing well requires not only expressing ideas but also refining them through revision, a process facilitated by reflection. Prior research suggests that feedback delivered through dialogues, such as those in writing center tutoring sessions, can help writers reflect more thoughtfully on their work compared to static feedback. Recent advancements in multi-modal large language models (LLMs) now offer new possibilities for supporting interactive and expressive voice-based reflection in writing. In particular, we propose that LLM-generated static feedback can be repurposed as conversation starters, allowing writers to seek clarification, request examples, and ask follow-up questions, thereby fostering deeper reflection on their writing. We argue that voice-based interaction can naturally facilitate this conversational exchange, encouraging writers' engagement with higher-order concerns, facilitating iterative refinement of their reflections, and reduce cognitive load compared to text-based interactions. To investigate these effects, we propose a formative study exploring how text vs. voice input influence writers' reflection and subsequent revisions. Findings from this study will inform the design of intelligent and interactive writing tools, offering insights into how voice-based interactions with LLM-powered conversational agents can support reflection and revision.more » « less
-
Code summarization is the task of creating short, natural language descriptions of source code. It is an important part of code comprehension and a powerful method of documentation. Previous work has made progress in identifying where programmers focus in code as they write their own summaries (i.e., Writing). However, there is currently a gap in studying programmers’ attention as they read code with pre-written summaries (i.e., Reading). As a result, it is currently unknown how these two forms of code comprehension compare: Reading and Writing. Also, there is a limited understanding of programmer attention with respect to program semantics. We address these shortcomings with a human eye-tracking study (n= 27) comparing Reading and Writing. We examined programmers’ attention with respect to fine-grained program semantics, including their attention sequences (i.e., scan paths). We find distinctions in programmer attention across the comprehension tasks, similarities in reading patterns between them, and differences mediated by demographic factors. This can help guide code comprehension in both computer science education and automated code summarization. Furthermore, we mapped programmers’ gaze data onto the Abstract Syntax Tree to explore another representation of human attention. We find that visual behavior on this structure is not always consistent with that on source code.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)We present the design and evaluation of a web-based intelligent writing assistant that helps students recognize their revisions of argumentative essays. To understand how our revision assistant can best support students, we have implemented four versions of our system with differences in the unit span (sentence versus sub-sentence) of revision analysis and the level of feedback provided (none, binary, or detailed revision purpose categorization). We first discuss the design decisions behind relevant components of the system, then analyze the efficacy of the different versions through a Wizard of Oz study with university students. Our results show that while a simple interface with no revision feedback is easier to use, an interface that provides a detailed categorization of sentence-level revisions is the most helpful based on user survey data, as well as the most effective based on improvement in writing outcomes.more » « less
