Article Sidebar

Submitted
April 12, 2018
Published
April 12, 2018
Download
PDF (Español (España))
Statistic
Read Counter : 258 Download : 205

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

This study focus on knowing the development of metacognitive awareness and undergraduates’ writer profile in relation to the synthesis tasks, highly demanded in Higher Education, but ineffectively carried out by many students. The sample consisted of 82 undergraduates, divided into two conditions in which they received instruction in synthesis tasks: explicit teaching and modeling with thinking aloud. They answered the following questionnaires i) Metacognitive knowledge about synthesis tasks, and ii) Spanish version of Questionnaire Concerning their Planning and Revising Tendencies. The results allow us to conclude that undergraduates’ self-knowledge about synthesis tasks is not adequate, although it can be improved with modeling or explicit teaching, as well as the students with a reviewer or planner writer profile are who show better metacognitive development.

Keywords

metacognitive self-knowledge cognitive modeling explicit teaching writing profile synthesis tasks

Article Details

How to Cite
Robledo Ramón, P., Arias-Gundín, O., Palomo, M. P., Andina, E., & Rodríguez, C. (2018). Undergraduates’writing Profile and their Metacognitive Knowledge of Academic Tasks. PUBLICACIONES, 48(1), 197–217. https://doi.org/10.30827/publicaciones.v48i1.7335
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

  1. Arias-Gundín, O., & Robledo, P. (2017). El conocimiento metacognitivo de las tareas de sintesis en el contexto universitario: Como promover su mejora.En Gázquez, M., M.
  2. Pérez, J., Molero, A., Barragán, A. Martos, & Sánchez, C. (Comps.), Temas actuales de investigación en las áreas de la Salud y la Educación (pp. 197-204). Almería: ASUNIVEP.
  3. Boscolo, P., Arfé, B., y Quarisa, M. (2007). Improving the quality of students’ academic writing: an intervention study. Studies in Higher Education, 32(4),419-438.
  4. Carlino, P. (2002). ¿Quién debe ocuparse de enseñar a leer y a escribir en la universidad? Tutorías, simulacros de examen y síntesis de clases en las humanidades. Lectura y Vida, 6-14.
  5. Castelló, M. (1999). El conocimiento que tienen los alumnos sobre la escritura. En J. I. Pozo y C. Monereo (Eds.), El aprendizaje estratégico (pp.197- 217). Madrid: Santillana.
  6. Castelló, M. (2007). El proceso de composición de textos académicos. En Castelló. M., et al. (Eds.), Escribir y comunicarse en contextos científicos y académicos: conocimientos y estrategias (pp. 47-82). Barcelona: Graó.
  7. Castelló, M. (2009). Aprender a escribir textos académicos: ¿copistas, escribas, compiladores o escritores? En J.I. Pozo y Pérez Echeverría, M. P. (Coords.), La Psicología del aprendizaje universitario: de la adquisición de conocimientos a la formación en competencias (pp.120-133). Madrid: Morata.
  8. Castelló, M., Bañales, G., y Vega, N. (2011). Leer múltiples documentos para escribir textos académicos en la universidad: o cómo aprender a leer y escribir en el lenguaje de las disciplinas. Pro Posições, Campinas, 22(64), 97-114.
  9. Fidalgo, R., Torrance, M., & Robledo, P. (2011). Comparación de dos programas de instrucción estratégica y autorregulada para la mejora de la competencia escrita. Psicothema, 23(4), 672-680.
  10. Finney, S.J., y DiStefano, C. (2006). Non-normal and categorical data in structural equation modeling. En G.R. Hancock y R.O. Muller (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: a second course (pp. 269-314). Greenwich, CT: InformationAge Publishing.
  11. Flower, L., Stein, V., Ackerman, J., Kantz, M., McCormick, K., y Peck, W.C. (1990). Reading to write. Exploring a cognitive and social process. Nueva York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  12. Galbraith, D., y Torrance, M. (2004). Revision in the context of different drafting strategies. En G. Rijlaarsdam, L. Allal, L. Chanquoy y P. Largy (Eds.), Revision: Cognitive and instructional processes. Studies in writing, vol. 13 (pp. 63-85). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
  13. González, J. y Wagenaar, R. (Coords.) (2203). Tuning Educational Structures in Europe. Informe Final Fase Uno. Bilbao: Universidad de Deusto.
  14. Graham, S., McKeown, D., Kiuhara, S., & Harris, K. R. (2012). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for students in the elementary grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(4), 879.
  15. Graham, S., y Perin, D. (2007). A Meta-Analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students. Journalod Educational Psychology, 99(3), 445-476.
  16. Granello, D. H. (2001) Promoting cognitive complexity in graduate written work: using Bloom’s taxonomy as a pedagogical tool to improve literature reviews. Counselor Education and Supervision, 40, 292–307.
  17. Greene, S. (1993). The role of task in the development of academic thinking though reading and writing in a collage History course. Research in the Teaching of English, 27(1), 46-75.
  18. Hammann, L. A., y Stevens, R. J. (2003). Instructional approaches to improving students’ writing of compare-contrast essays: an experimental study. Journal of Literacy Research, 35, 731-756.
  19. Hayes, J. (2012). Modeling and Remodeling Writing. Written Communication, 29(3), 369-388.
  20. Kieft, M., Rijlaarsdam, G., Galbraith, D., y van den Bergh, H. (2007). The effects of adapting a writing course to students’ writing strategies. BritishJournal of Educational Psychology, 77, 565-578.
  21. Kieft, M., Rijlaarsdam, G., y van den Bergh, H. (2006). Writing as a learning tool: Testing the role of students’ writing strategies. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 21(1), 17-34.
  22. Kieft, M., Rijlaarsdam, G., y van den Bergh, H. (2008). An aptitude-treatment interaction approach to writing-to-lear. Learning and Instruction, 18, 379-390.
  23. Kirkpatrick, L. C., y Klein, P. D. (2009). Planning text structure as a way to improve students’ writing from sources in the compare-contrast genre. Learning and Instruction, 19, 309-321.
  24. Lenski, S. D., y Johns, J. L. (1997). Patterns of reading-to-write, Reading Research and Instruction, 37(1), 15-38.
  25. Levy, C. M., &Ransdell, S. (1996). Writingsignatures. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing. Theories, methods, individual differences and applications (pp. 149–161). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  26. Mateos, M., y Solé, I. (2009). Synthesing information from various texts: A study of procedures and products at different educational levels. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 24(4), 435-451.
  27. McGinley, W. (1992). The role of reading and writing while composing from multiple sources. Reading Research Quarterly, 27, 227-248.
  28. Radolff, A., y de la Harpe, B. (2000, Julio). Helping students develop their writing skills –a resource for lecturers. Paper presents to ASET Higher Education Research and Development in South Asia Conference, Toowoomba (Queensland).
  29. Robledo, P. (2016). Eficacia de un programa de instrucción estratégica para la mejora de las síntesis escritas en alumnado universitario. En M. Pérez, J. Gázquez, M., Molero, A. Martos, Simón, M., & Barragán, A. (Comps.), Variables Psicológicas y Educativas para la Intervención en el Ámbito escolar (pp. 2888-2894). Almería: ASUNIVEP.
  30. Robledo, P. (2017). Escritura de textos síntesis en el contexto universitario: el papel del autoconocimiento de la tarea y de la estrategia. En Gázquez, M., M. Pérez, J., Molero, A., Barragán, A. Martos, & Sánchez, C. (Comps.), Temas actuales de investigación en las áreas de la Salud y la Educación (pp. 171-178). Almería: ASUNIVEP.
  31. Robledo, P. (Agosto, 2014). Declarative knowledge about cognitive processes of writing and written competence in university students. Paper presents to Conference on Writing Research (Sig Writing-EARLI), Amterdam (Holanda).
  32. Robledo, P., Fidalgo, R., Arias-Gundín, O., Sánchez, R., & Olivares, F. (2016). Instrucción estratégica en tareas de síntesis en el contexto universitario. En J. L. Castejón (Coord.), Psicología y Educación: Presente y futuro (pp. 2654-2661). Madrid: ACIPE.
  33. Segev-Miller, R. (2004). Writing from sources: the effect of explicit instruction on college students’ processes and products. L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 4, 5-33.
  34. Solé, I., Miras, M., Castells, N., Espino, S., y Minguela, M. (2013). Integrating information: an analysis of the processes involved and the products generated in a written synthesis ask. Written Communication, 30(1), 63- 90. doi: 10.1177/07410883124665320.
  35. Spivey, N. (1984). Discourse synthesis: Constructing texts in reading and writing. (Outstanding Dissertation Monograph Series). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
  36. Spivey, N. N. (1990). Transforming texts: Constructive processes in reading and writing. Written Communication, 7, 256-287.
  37. Spivey, N. N. (1997) The constructivist metaphor: reading, writing and the making of meaning. San Diego: CA, Academic Press.
  38. Spivey, N. N. y King, J. R. (1989) Readers as writers composing from sources. Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 7–27.
  39. Torrance, M., Thomas, G.V., y Robinson, E.J. (1994). The writing strategies of graduatere search students in the social sciences. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 27, 379-392.
  40. Torrance, M., Thomas, G.V., y Robinson, E.J. (1999). Individual differences in the writing behaviour of undergraduate students. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, 189-199.
  41. Torrance, M., Thomas, G.V., y Robinson, E.J. (2000). Individual differences in undergraduateessay-writing strategies: A longitudinal study. HigherEducation, 39, 181–200.
  42. Vázquez, A. (2005). ¿Alfabetización en la universidad? En A. Rivarosa (Coomp.), Estaciones para el debate. Un mapa de diálogo con la cultura universitaria. Argentina: Ed. Universidad Nacional de Río Cuarto.
  43. Vázquez, A., y Jakob, I. (2006). Escribir textos académicos en la universidad: intervención didáctica y enfoque de los estudiantes. RevistaEnsayos y Experiencias, 63.