To measure writer’s resources, tests on linguistic knowledge and topic familiarity and a survey questionnaire on writing background were administered to the same students.
To measure writer’s idea generation process while composing, a Likert Scale questionnaire based on Chenoweth and Hayes 20 models was designed and administered to the students after their diagnostic essay task.
Drawing on proficiency and cognitive models from previous studies, Schoonen et al.
() also recognized that different components of knowledge and skills are fundamentally relevant to writer’s performance.
Recent research, however, have focused not only on composing processes but also on the factors in the writers’ long term memory, (which Chenoweth & Hayes ) recognized that writing performance is dependent on the interplay of several factors such as L1 writing ability, L2 proficiency, L2 metaknowledge, and prior L2 writing experience/education.
Among the three variables that they quantitatively measured, L2 proficiency accounted for the biggest portion of L2 performance variance.Also, the comparison of the contributions of knowledge tests (linguistic and metaknowledge) vis-a-vis speed of processing, showed that speed of processing, although correlated to writing proficiency, had almost no unique contribution in predicting writing proficiency in L1 and L2., 2003) have developed a more detailed process involved in text production, which captures the interplay between knowledge stored in the memory and the processes that are at work in accessing these knowledge.The model includes three levels: the control level, the resource level, and the process level.The present study will examine only the first internal component, the proposer, by measuring the idea generation processes of students while composing.In sum, in producing a text, any of the internal processes at the process level may activate long-term memory, working memory, or critical reading in the resource level in order to complete the goals set by the control level.Similarly, Becker () claimed that novice writers possessed a grim view of rewriting—viewing it as punitive; while expert or skilled writers viewed rewriting as an opportunity to discover ways to improve the quality of the text.Gustilo () concluded that proficient writers, whether they plan or not during the pre-writing stage, may have the same results.Researchers all agree that the writer’s processes involved while composing written tasks can shed light in differentiating the characteristics of skilled writers from poor writers.The main aim of the present pilot study is to assess the writing performance of Filipino college freshmen engineering students and to relate this performance to the other factors that impact writing performance within the cognitive process model framework of Chenoweth and Hayes ().Examining the processes utilized by language learners in composing helps identify how these processes function in writing among writers.More importantly, describing these processes has helped characterize the differences and/or similarities between good and poor writers.