Abstracts - Earli

Keyboard typing or handwriting: Which leads to better performance in university students andsecondary school students?Joachim Grabowski, Heidelberg University of Education, GermanyWe report on a research project based on the assumption that, in low-ability secondary schoolstudents, keyboard typing would facilitate writing tasks as compared to handwriting. For thesestudents (as opposed to university students who were also studies in comparison), keyboard use ismore motivating, and handwriting is not yet fully automated. It turned out, however, that there is asubstantial lack of knowledge of basic keyboard functions such as using the space bar, creatingupper-case letters, performing corrections, or navigating through the text. As a result, weconducted a study in which we applied a five hour training of basic keyboard functions. Pre- andpost-tests were taken with a copy task, thus concentrating on low-level processes (transcriptionand execution). All writing activities were recorded with ScriptLog. Results show substantialpositive effects on time on task, transition times between letters, general keyboard activity andnavigation. However, correcting behavior and text quality did not change after such a brieftraining.Using L1-acquired knowledge about writing in FL writing: An exploratory studyAnna Inesta, Ramon Llull University, SpainMontserrat Castello, Ramon Llull University, SpainTwo main questions have guided L2 writing research: one refers to the influence of L2 proficiencyand knowledge about writing or writing skill, and the other refers to the role of L1 use in L2writing. Our exploratory study aimed to contribute to clarify such questions by exploring theinfluence of L1-acquired strategic knowledge about writing in the foreign language writingprocess. Participants were an undergraduate and a postgraduate student at the Universität RamonLlull. The latter had attended an academic writing seminar thus having presumably acquiredcomplex knowledge about writing in her L1. Participants’ L2 proficiency level was betweenintermediate and advanced. Data regarding their conceptions about writing and about themselvesas writers were collected by means of an open-ended survey adapted from Lonka et al. (1996), asemi-structured interview, and a stimulated recall interview. The use of L1-acquired strategicknowledge and the role of writers’ L1 during the FL writing process were analyzed by means ofthe think-aloud protocols, connected with the evolving text, and the stimulated recall interview.All these data were audio and video recorded. Using the same argumentative task as Raimes(1985), and Roca de Larios et al. (2001), a modification was introduced halfway through thewriting process in order to promote on-line use of regulation strategies. Transcriptions of the datawere analyzed qualitatively (using content analysis) and quantitatively (in terms of frequency andtemporal distribution of writing strategies). The results obtained show, firstly, that writer 2 usedL1-acquired writing strategies during FL composition process. Secondly, results also show that L1use was mostly associated with process regulation. Finally, strategic knowledge about writingallowed writer 2 to successfully regulate her negative feelings towards the task.Early correlates of word reading and passage comprehension in GreekPanayiota Kendeou, Cyprus Pedagogical Institute, CyprusTimothy C. Papadopoulos, University of Cyprus, CyprusMaria Constantinidou, Cyprus Ministry of Education and Culture, CyprusStefanos Demetriou, University of Cyprus, Cyprus– 851 –