Planning and revision skills were unrelated, and neither predicted self-efficacy, in the studied samples¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2013 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? The paths Planning→Revision, Planning→Self-efficacy, and Revision→Self-efficacy were non-significant in both groups and were deleted from the final model. → Limpo 2013

Evidence¶

Limpo 2013¶

Limpo, T., & Alves, R. A. (2013). Modeling writing development: Contribution of transcription and self-regulation to Portuguese students' text generation quality. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105, 401-413. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031391

q3 · i? · associational · r2

Model respecification in the SEM removed the non-significant paths among the self-regulation constructs for both grade groups; the authors note writers' planning and revising skills "did not develop in tandem" in this sample.

"to produce the most parsimonious model, the non-significant paths for both groups were deleted (viz., Planning Revision, Planning Self-efficacy, and Revision Self-Efficacy)"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Revision skill was not related to writing quality in either grade group — related
• Transcription predicts planning, revision, and self-efficacy in both grade groups — related
• Transcription, planning, revision, and self-efficacy explain 76% of writing-quality variance in Grades 4-6 and 82% in Grades 7-9 — related