Characteristics of EFL Readers' Summary Writing
A Study with Korean University Students
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 8936801 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Sung‐Ae Kim (Pusan National University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2001 |
| Volume | 34 |
| Issue | 6 |
| Pages | 569-581 |
| Publication date | 2001-11-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Foreign Language Annals (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0015-718X • E-ISSN: 1944-9720 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1944-9720.2001.tb02104.x |
| OpenAlex | W1983553454 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 9 |
| References cited | 23 |
This study reports part of the findings of a study of Korean EFL students' skill in summarizing an English text. The participants were 70 freshmen who were assumed to possess the typical Korean EFL students' characteristics related to summary writing. The two English texts employed were expository texts taken from a college‐level ESL reading book. One of the texts ( i.e., Text A ) was assumed to be easier than the other ( i.e., Text B ) . Data gathered from two summaries were analyzed in terms of the content idea units included in the summary, the idea units on four importance levels, use of three summarization rules ( i.e., deletion, selection, and transformation ) , and accuracy. According to the results, the participants in this study were sensitive, though not fully, to importance. The most frequently used rule was the deletion rule, and the least frequently used rule was the transformation rule. Analysis of data also revealed that text difficulty can affect the summary writer's behavior Changes in the writers' behaviors due to text difficulty were noted in the proportion of content idea units included in the summary, the use of selection and transformation rules, and in the accuracy rate, but not in the use of the deletion rule or total rule use. Results indicate that Korean EFL students do not possess effective summarization skills and are in need of appropriate instruction and practice to improve these skills
Affect (linguistics · Automatic summarization · Linguistics · Mathematics education · Natural language processing · Reading (process · Reading comprehension · Selection (genetic algorithm · Artificial Intelligence · Communication · Computer Science · Discourse Analysis in Language Studies · EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning · Psychology · Writing and Handwriting Education
Research in Teaching Writing
Literacy engagement in the extended French and French immersion programmes (Grades 4–6)
Students' writing from sources for academic purposes
Making Sense of Research
Difficulty of Summarization Items for Japanese Learners
An exploratory analysis of source integration in post-secondary L1 and L2 source-based writing
Reading to summarize in English and Chinese
A Comparison of Distractor Selection Among Proficiency Levels in Reading Tests
Cognitive Styles and Gender as Predictors of Students' Achievement in Summary Writing in Selected Secondary Schools in Ibadan, Nigeria
Taking different perspectives on a story.
Toward a model of text comprehension and production.
Strategies of discourse comprehension
Coherence and Academic Writing
Maximizing Student Performance in Summary Writing
Strategic Difficulties in Summarizing Texts
Some Effects of Summarization Training on Reading and Studying
The Effects of Text Structure Instruction on Middle-Grade Students' Comprehension and Production of Expository Text
Summary Writing by Young Children
Direct Instruction of Summarization Skills
Text Summarization Deficiencies Among Older Students
| Unique citing works | 9 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0.41 |
| Citation span | 2004 - 2021 (18) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 7 |