essay writing is a recursive process discuss

Midlands State University

Essay writing is a recursive process. Discuss?

Top contributors to discussions in this field.

The World Islamic Science and Education University (WISE)

University of Saskatchewan

Federal University of Technology, Akure

Otto-von-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg

Gumushane University

Get help with your research

Join ResearchGate to ask questions, get input, and advance your work.

All Answers (3)

recursi ve.jpg 49.60 KB

Related Publications

Recruit researchers
Join for free
Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

Guide to Writing at Stetson University

You the Writer

Writing as a Process: Writing is Recursive

Know the right moves for college writing, build an argument, not an opinion, is every assignment an argument, know the two most important kinds of sentences: thesis and topic sentences, introduce your sources with purpose and show relationships between ideas.

Understand and Use Sophisticated Punctuation

Speaking and Writing English (when it isn’t your first language)
Writing in the Disciplines
University Writing Rubric
A Biology grade rubric
The Four Point scale
General Descriptive Rubric
Information Literacy and Fluency (Research Fundamentals)
General Citations
Copyright Basics
The Writing Reference

Writing is a process. Writers don’t just sit down and produce an essay, well-formed and ideal in every respect--we work at the stages and steps. But writing is not only a process: it’s also a measure of learning and your thinking, and so the process has to stop at various points so that your measure can be taken. Good academic writing is both a process and a product.

Writing is recursive. “Recursive” simply means that each step you take in your writing process will feed into other steps: after you’ve drafted an essay, for instance, you’ll go do a bit of verification of some of your facts—and if you discover that you’ve gotten something wrong, you’ll go back to the draft and fix it. But doing that may well require you to loop back to a different section of your essay to rewrite or to take it out altogether-and that revision, in turn, might mean that you need to rethink your organization. At some point, you know that the work is done.

To be successful at college-level writing, students need to be willing to learn the new moves. Writing for the demands of college is challenging, but it can be a little easier if students understand up front that readers at the college level expect to see certain skills be demonstrated.

Know what a college-level essay looks like in the appropriate discipline (your professors should show you examples)
Keep the focus of your work narrow (don't take on too much! Given the choice, go deep rather than broad)
Compose and revise to create a thesis statement and topic sentences
Introduce your sources with a purpose
Show relationships between ideas
Use sophisticated punctuation

Know What a College Level Essay Looks Like (generally)

While professors at Stetson have specific expectations for what their students turn in, students may not always understand the depth for the expectations. Some professors will show examples of what they want; some will not. In general, while each of your professors will provide a clear assignment, students may benefit from seeing an outline of what that assignment might entail.

The key differences are several:

The need for a clear and directive thesis or purpose statement;
The expectation of substantial consideration of other viewpoints and perspectives;
The use of sources to develop and explore a point made by the writer (not just to support the point itself); and
The need for the conclusion to do something other than summarize

Know What a College Level Essay Looks Like (in your discipline)

Not every assignment students get at Stetson will look like the above list. For example, writing assignments in Life Sciences prioritize a clear discussion of methods and results, often to test the work of others (in which case, using sources "to explore a point" may look very different. Ask your instructor to help you with these differences.

Here is a link to a video that demonstrates how to write a college-level essay.

Many students come to college thinking that “arguing” in an essay means to present a well- supported position. The definition of “argue” thus becomes a defense rather than an inquiry. In the real world, we're accustomed to "arguing" as trying to win. In college, "arguing" means to present a line of thought that takes into account different perspectives, additional evidence, and new ideas as it comes to a conclusion. In other words, a strong argument is one that incorporates both sides effectively.

https://miro.medium.com/max/2700/1*7NKDqKz8LG8bffMQoGIhqg.png

Sophisticated thinkers and writers seek to advance and deepen the understanding via discussion; thus, at college we seek to encourage deeper discussions with the goal to have a richer and fuller understanding. To do this well, it’s important to go deeply into a subject rather than stay on the surface. While the approach of defending a position rather than exploring its layers may feel somewhat easier, there are only so many ways to learn from general subjects; we learn more, and find opportunities for growth and development more easily, when we narrow down the field of interest. As we work with an idea and consider it carefully, we continue to narrow it down, zeroing in on a particular angle or position that interests us and meets the needs of the assignment.

Identifying a position requires several steps:

First , understand the subject area from which the argument must come.
Second , break that subject area down into topics
Third , focus on developing a question whose answer can be identified and defended. As the subject undergoes continual narrowing and focusing, specific questions develop; the reasoned, detailed, careful answer to those questions becomes the argument.
Fourth , read, research, and discuss the potential answers to the question you’re asking so that your writing is multidimensional and well supported. The Guide’s chapter on “Using Your Resources” deals with this element of the process.

Remember: A true argument requires that other perspectives be taken into account, because once you have found a focus and can easily develop an opinion or come to a position on the questions that have been created, this can provide an opportunity for a discussion, exploration of different perspectives, and dialogue about values.

Opinion : statement of writer’s general attitude toward a specific subject, issue or event
Position : announcement of writer’s general attitude toward a specific subject, issue, or event, with explanation of reasons
Argument : statement that captures a spirit of debate and discussion about a specific topic, issue, or event

Not every writing assignment students get in their courses will be an argument essay. As mentioned earlier, students here write lab reports, correspondence, proposals, brochures, arguments, applications, evaluations, analyses, and host of others.

We also ask that students consider and evaluate questions and ideas, formulate their own responses to those ideas, and then do something with those responses: argue, defend, propose, compare, and analyze are some of the things we do with our responses to ideas. Each kind of assignment has a different purpose.

Generally speaking, arguments take two kinds of shapes: one is a shape that actively argues with its reader from the start, presenting its position and systematically defending against its opposition by marshalling evidence that will defeat an opposing viewpoint. This focuses on difference. One other popular shape starts from a position of unity and common ground, and then, as each element of common ground on a position is discussed, the writer’s position becomes clearer.

A strong writer develops through practice in a variety of forms and audiences and purposes. That's why Stetson requires you to have four different writing-enhanced (WE) courses. The practice helps build "muscle" and a set of strategies to respond to new situations.

Students consider and evaluate questions and ideas, formulate their own responses to those ideas, and then do something with those responses. Argue, defend, propose, compare, and analyze are some of the things we do with our responses to ideas. Each kind of assignment has a different purpose.

Generally speaking, arguments take two kinds of shapes: one is a shape that actively argues with its reader from the start, presenting its position and systematically defending against its opposition by marshalling evidence that will defeat an opposing viewpoint. This focuses on difference. One other popular shape starts from position of unity and common ground, and then, as each element of common ground on a position is discussed, the writer’s position becomes clearer.

Here is a link that shows brief examples and descriptions of what assignments students may encounter at Stetson.

Thesis statements and topic sentences perform nearly the same function in your writing: each one makes a claim, or states a main idea, and each one serves as a central focus connecting ideas presented earlier and leads to ideas about to come.

A classic thesis statement demonstrates three specific elements:

It states a main idea, which the essay will go on to explain and develop
It goes beyond statements of fact or announcement-type statements
It offers the reader some idea of the direction of the essay

Writing thesis statements worksheet - The Perfect Dress | Writing ...

Whereas a thesis statement captures the main idea of an essay and provides structure and direction, a topic sentence introduces a paragraph’s main claim or idea. When we read a well put- together paragraph, we can identify the topic sentence relatively easily: it’s the one making a claim, and the other sentences are adding support and explanation. We typically find the topic sentence of a paragraph at the starting or ending position; at the start of a paragraph, the topic sentence makes a claim or point that will then be developed and supported. At the close of the paragraph, the topic sentence brings the reader to a conclusion that's just been made.

Introduce Your Sources With Purpose

Inexperienced writers often us this particular technique:

“Prostitution in Dubai is ruining the city’s reputation” (Alexis).

While functional, this approach to using a source is so minimal as to be almost ineffective. Note, for example, that the reader has not been told who "Alexis" is, what their credentials are, where this information has come from (and whether it is credible.)

However, look at the difference between that example and the next, paying close attention to the introduction of the source as well as the mention of the origin of the source material:

Shakar Alexis, a prominent sociologist, warns in Dubai News that “Prostitution in Dubai is ruining the city’s reputation” (Alexis).

In the second example, the student has introduced the speaker using their full name, has provided the reader with some idea of the speaker’s credentials, and has given the source of the speaker’s words. Finally, in the parentheses, the student has documented the source. Note also that the student has used an effective verb, "warn," to introduce and characterize the quotation.

Choosing your words and embedding useful information carefully provides readers with a richer, more complete experience.

Show Relationships between Ideas

Your writing should show your thinking forms a whole. That is, your thinking forms a coherent unified idea by using transitional words and phrases. These may be used between paragraphs, to show the big connections among the ideas in your writing, or between sentence, to show the train do thinking that leads you to connect one claim to the next.

This chart provides a useful reference for students looking for just the right word to show the relationship between two paragraphs’ or two sentences’ main ideas:

Transition words/phrases | Transition words, Transition words for ...

Sentence punctuation involves using commas, semicolons, colons, periods, parentheses, and dashes to coordinate sections of sentences (phrases and clauses) into coherent wholes.

An independent clause is one that can function on its own as a sentence: it has a subject and a verb. It looks like a complete sentence. When you put together independent clauses, you need to signal that coordination with some sort of punctuation.

Link independent clauses in four ways :

Comma plus conjunction : I wasn’t ready for school to start, but it started anyway
Semicolon : I wasn’t ready for school to start; it seemed like summer should have stretched on forever
Semicolon and transitional word/phrase : I wasn’t ready for school to start; however, the first day turned out to be enjoyable.
Colon : I wasn’t ready for school to start: time had sped past me all summer

Link items in a series with some sort of punctuation . You can use commas or semicolons depending on your intended effect:

Commas : We can look at the increased coral deaths, melting polar ice caps, and the gradual decline of biodiversity as evidence of climate change.
Semicolons : Resolving the climate problems will take increased attention from governments; stronger sanctions for violators; and a genuine realization that our species is in trouble.

Colons and dashes set off examples and explanations so that each one gets the proper attention from the reader:

Colons : It doesn’t get any easier than this: I can pass some of my classes just by doing the work.
Dashes : I can pass some of my classes just by doing the assignments—I guess that means I’d better schedule time for homework.

Use colons, dashes, and parentheses to set off the important information from the rest of the sentence:

Commas : Before we can tackle our serious problems, most importantly humanitarian crises in Darfur and the African continent, we have to admit that they exist.
Dashes : It doesn’t take much milk to make pancakes--just a cup or so will do it--but using skim milk instead of whole milk will reduce calories.
Parentheses : I know a lot about being a student (but I don't know much about how to get a job after this).
Punctuation Overview at Purdue
The Punctuation Guide
<< Previous: You the Writer
Next: Speaking and Writing English (when it isn’t your first language) >>
Last Updated: Jun 20, 2024 6:06 PM
URL: https://guides.stetson.edu/WritingGuideStetsonU

Have a question? Ask a librarian! Email [email protected]. Call or text 386-747-9028.

Mailing List
Search Search

Username or Email Address

Remember Me

Resources for Writers: The Writing Process

Writing is a process that involves at least four distinct steps: prewriting, drafting, revising, and editing. It is known as a recursive process. While you are revising, you might have to return to the prewriting step to develop and expand your ideas.

Prewriting is anything you do before you write a draft of your document. It includes thinking, taking notes, talking to others, brainstorming, outlining, and gathering information (e.g., interviewing people, researching in the library, assessing data).
Although prewriting is the first activity you engage in, generating ideas is an activity that occurs throughout the writing process.
Drafting occurs when you put your ideas into sentences and paragraphs. Here you concentrate upon explaining and supporting your ideas fully. Here you also begin to connect your ideas. Regardless of how much thinking and planning you do, the process of putting your ideas in words changes them; often the very words you select evoke additional ideas or implications.
Don’t pay attention to such things as spelling at this stage.
This draft tends to be writer-centered: it is you telling yourself what you know and think about the topic.
Revision is the key to effective documents. Here you think more deeply about your readers’ needs and expectations. The document becomes reader-centered. How much support will each idea need to convince your readers? Which terms should be defined for these particular readers? Is your organization effective? Do readers need to know X before they can understand Y?
At this stage you also refine your prose, making each sentence as concise and accurate as possible. Make connections between ideas explicit and clear.
Check for such things as grammar, mechanics, and spelling. The last thing you should do before printing your document is to spell check it.
Don’t edit your writing until the other steps in the writing process are complete.

The Recursive Writing Process

Author Louis L’Amour said, “Start writing, no matter what. The water does not flow until the faucet is turned on.”

But how do you go about writing an essay, a story, or a novel? How do you even get started? One method of writing that can help is the recursive writing process .

The recursive writing process can be broken down into four simple steps:

Because this process is recursive, you can revisit old steps after you’ve moved on to the editing process.

Prewriting happens before a single word goes on the page. This includes things like choosing a topic. Are you going to write about something you know personally? Are you writing about a historical event? Maybe your topic is fictional!

Whatever you choose to write about, you will need to do some brainstorming . How long will it be? What format will it be in? Will you have dialogue, or will it be a research paper with citations ?

Every type of writing requires different preparation. For a research paper, you might need to find online sources, peer-reviewed journals, or even interviews of experts on the topic. A science-fiction story might need research into how things like lasers and spacecraft work. Historical fiction might have you looking into styles of dress and manners of that time period.

Using an outline will help you break down and organize the different parts of your paper. There may be changes as you go along, but an outline helps you visualize your writing as a whole so it doesn’t end up choppy and confusing for the reader to follow.

Once you finish your outline, it’s time to write your first draft. When you start writing, you do not have to start with the intro. Sometimes it is easier and better to start in the middle of your paper and add the intro in later.

You can break down your middle into different points or different sources. Having one paragraph per source is usually the way to go. This makes it easy for the reader to pay attention to each source individually while still being aware of how all the sources come together to make sense of the overall topic.

Once your first draft is complete, you’ll need to start revising . Revising is the point at which you start polishing up your work. You should start to cut things out of your work and add clarity to it. Sentences that go nowhere, unneeded descriptions, and repetitive words need to be removed. If ideas can be condensed from a paragraph to a sentence, do it! Unless you have a mandatory word count, less with clarity is much better than more with repetition.

It can be very helpful to have a friend read your paper during this stage. Does everything make sense to them? Can they give you a summary of what you wrote about easily, or is there too much going on for them to grasp it all? If your reader can’t summarize what you wrote, then they typically did not understand what you wrote.

Editing is making your writing polished and ready to be presented. Now is the time to use spell check, grammar check, and even search for improperly used words that often get overlooked.

Check over your citation use, and make sure each separate idea gets its own paragraph. Also, check your use of transition words!

Editing is the last step; you should not worry about editing your paper until everything else is ready to go.

This is when you correct any tiny mistakes you may have missed and add your title. Chapter headings, bibliographies, and all additional pages should be added in the editing process if they have not been created yet. If you have guidelines you need to follow, such as font size, margin width, and spacing this is also the time to give those a final look over.

Once your paper is edited, you’re done! These four steps of the recursive writing process seem easy once you get to the end, but they are a huge help when you are getting started. So whether you are writing an essay for school or working on the next bestselling novel, you can use the recursive writing process to make your writing flow.

Thanks so much for watching. See you next time and, as always, happy studying!

Return to Writing Videos

by Mometrix Test Preparation | Last Updated: July 27, 2023

Composition Resources

Writing Is Recursive

Christopher Blankenship

In a recent interview , Steven Pinker, Harvard professor and author of The Sense of Style: The Thinking Person’s Guide to Writing in the 21st Century , was asked how he approaches the revision of his own writing. His answer? “Recursively and frequently.”

What does Pinker mean when he says “recursively,” though?

historical document in tight cursive with "We the People" at the top

U.S. Constitution

You’re probably familiar with the root of the word: “cursive.” It’s the style of writing that you may have been taught in elementary school or that you’ve seen in historical documents like the Declaration of Independence or Constitution.

“Cursive” comes from the Latin word currere , meaning “to run.” Combine this meaning with the English prefix “re-” (to do again), and you have some clues for the meaning of “recursive.”

In modern English, recursion is used to describe a process that loops or “runs again” until a task is complete. It’s a term often used in computer science to indicate a program or piece of code that continues to run until certain conditions are met, such as a variable determined by the user of the program. The program would continue counting upwards—running—until it came to that variable.

So, what does recursion have to do with writing?

You’ve probably heard writing teachers talk about the idea of the “ writing process” before. In a nutshell, although writing always ends with the creation of a “product,” the process that leads to that product determines how effective the writing will be. It’s why a carefully thought-out essay tends to be better than one that’s written the night before the due date. It’s also why college writing teachers often emphasize the idea of process in their classes in addition to evaluating final products.

There are many ways to think about the writing process, but here’s one that my students have said makes sense to them. It involves five separate ways of thinking about a writing task:

Invention: Coming up with ideas.

This can include thinking about what you want to accomplish with your writing, who will be reading your writing and how to adapt to them, the genre you are writing in, your position on a topic, what you know about a topic already, etc. Invention can be as formal as brainstorm activities like mind mapping and as informal as thinking about your writing task over breakfast.

Research: Finding new information.

Even if you’re not writing a research paper, you still generally have to figure out new things to complete a writing task. This can include the traditional reading of books, articles, and websites to find information to cite in a paper, but it can also include just reading up on a topic to learn more about it, interviewing an expert, looking at examples of the genre that you’re using to figure out what its characteristics are, taking careful notes on a text that you’re analyzing, or anything else that helps you to learn something important for your writing.

Drafting: Creating the text.

This is the part that we’re all familiar with: putting words down on paper, writing introductions and conclusions, and creating cohesive paragraphs and clear sentences. But, beyond the words themselves, drafting can also include shaping the medium for your writing, such as creating an e-portfolio where your writing will be displayed. Writing includes making design choices, such as formatting, font and color use, including and positioning images, and citing sources appropriately.

Revision: Literally, seeing the text again.

I’m talking about the big ideas here: looking over what you’ve created to see if you’ve accomplished your purpose, that you’ve effectively considered your audience, that your text is cohesive and coherent, and that it does the things that other texts in that genre do.

Editing: Looking at the surface level of the text.

Editing sometimes gets lumped in with revision (or replaces it entirely). I think it’s helpful to consider them as two separate ways of thinking about a text. Editing involves thinking about the clarity of word choice and sentence structure, noticing spelling and grammatical errors, making sure that source citations meet the requirements of your citation style, and other such issues. Even if editing isn’t big-concept like revision is, it’s still a very important way of thinking about a writing task.

Now, you may be thinking, “Okay, that’s great and all, but it still doesn’t tell me what recursion has to do with writing.” Well, notice how I called these five ways of thinking rather than “steps” or “stages” of the writing process? That’s because of recursion.

In your previous writing experiences, you’ve probably thought about your writing in all of the ways listed above, even if you used different terms or organized the ideas differently. However, Nancy Sommers, a researcher in rhetoric and writing studies, has found [1] that student writers tend to think about the writing process in a simple, linear way that mimics speech:

arrows pointing from invention to research to drafting to revision to editing in a row

This process starts with thinking about the writing task and then moves through each part in order until, after editing, you’re finished. Even if you don’t do this every time, I’m betting that this linear process is probably familiar to you, especially if you just graduated high school.

On the other hand, Sommers also researched how experienced writers approach a writing task. She found that their writing process is different from that of student writers:

arrows connecting invention, research, drafting, revision and editing to each other in all directions

Unlike student writers, professional writers, like Steven Pinker, don’t view each part of the writing process as a step to be visited just once in a particular order. Yes, they generally begin with invention and end with editing, but they view each part of the process as a valuable way of thinking that can be revisited again and again until they are confident that the product effectively meets their goals.

For example, a colleague and I wrote a chapter for a book on working conditions at colleges, a topic we’re interested in.

When we started, we had to come up with an idea for the text by talking through our experiences and deciding on a purpose for the text. [Invention]
Although we both knew something about the topic already, we read articles and talked to experts to learn more about it. [Research]
From that research, we decided that our original idea didn’t quite fit with the research that was out there already, so we made some changes to the big idea. [Invention]
After that, we sat down and, over several sessions on different days, created a draft of our text. [Drafting]
When we read through the text, we discovered that the order of the information didn’t make as much sense as we had first thought, so we moved around some paragraphs, making changes to those paragraphs to help the flow of the new order. [Revision]
After that, we sent the rough draft to the editors of the book for feedback. When we got the chapter back, the editors commented that our topic didn’t quite fit the theme of the book, so, using that feedback, we changed the focus of the ideas. [Invention]
Then we changed the text to reflect those new ideas. [Revision]
We also got feedback from peer reviewers who pointed out that one part of the text was a little confusing, so we had to learn more about the ideas in that section. [Research]
We changed the text to reflect that new understanding. [Revision and Editing]
After the editors were satisfied with those revisions, we proofread the article and sent it off for final approval. [Editing]

In this process, we produced three distinct drafts, but each of those drafts represents several different ways that we made changes, small and large, to the text to better craft it for our audience, purpose, and context.

One goal of required college writing courses is to help you move from the mindset of the student writer to that of the experienced writer. Revisiting the big ideas of a writing task can be tough. Cutting several paragraphs because you find that they don’t meet the purpose of the writing task, throwing out research sources and having to search for more, completely reorganizing a text, or even reconsidering the genre can be a lot of work. But if you’re willing to put aside the linear steps and view invention, research, drafting, revision, and editing as ways of thinking that can be revisited over and over again until you accomplish your goal, you will become a more successful writer.

Although your future professors, bosses, co-workers, clients, and patients may only see the final product, mastering a complex, recursive writing process will help you to create effective texts for any situation you encounter.

“Revision Strategies of Student Writers and Experienced Adult Writers” in College Composition and Communication 31.4, 378-88. ↵

Share This Book

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Writing Is Recursive

Chris Blankenship

What does Pinker mean when he says “recursively,” though?

So, what does recursion have to do with writing?

There are many ways to think about the writing process, but here’s one that my students have said makes sense to them. It involves five separate ways of thinking about a writing task:

Invention: Coming up with ideas.

Research: Finding new information.

Drafting: Creating the text.

Revision: Literally, seeing the text again.

Editing: Looking at the surface level of the text.

On the other hand, Sommers also researched how experienced writers approach a writing task. She found that their writing process is different from that of student writers:

For example, a colleague and I wrote a chapter for a book on working conditions at colleges, a topic we’re interested in.

When we started, we had to come up with an idea for the text by talking through our experiences and deciding on a purpose for the text. [Invention]
Although we both knew something about the topic already, we read articles and talked to experts to learn more about it. [Research]
From that research, we decided that our original idea didn’t quite fit with the research that was out there already, so we made some changes to the big idea. [Invention]
After that, we sat down and, over several sessions on different days, created a draft of our text. [Drafting]
When we read through the text, we discovered that the order of the information didn’t make as much sense as we had first thought, so we moved around some paragraphs, making changes to those paragraphs to help the flow of the new order. [Revision]
After that, we sent the rough draft to the editors of the book for feedback. When we got the chapter back, the editors commented that our topic didn’t quite fit the theme of the book, so, using that feedback, we changed the focus of the ideas. [Invention]
Then we changed the text to reflect those new ideas. [Revision]
We also got feedback from peer reviewers who pointed out that one part of the text was a little confusing, so we had to learn more about the ideas in that section. [Research]
We changed the text to reflect that new understanding. [Revision and Editing]
After the editors were satisfied with those revisions, we proofread the article and sent it off for final approval. [Editing]

“Revision Strategies of Student Writers and Experienced Adult Writers” in College Composition and Communication 31.4, 378–88 ↵

Share This Book

An Overview of the Writing Process

Defining the writing process.

People often think of writing in terms of its end product—the email, the report, the memo, essay, or research paper, all of which result from the time and effort spent in the act of writing. In this course, however, you will be introduced to writing as the recursive process of planning, drafting, and revising.

Writing is Recursive

You will focus as much on the process of writing as you will on its end product (the writing you normally submit for feedback or a grade). Recursive means circling back; and, more often than not, the writing process will have you running in circles. You might be in the middle of your draft when you realize you need to do more brainstorming, so you return to the planning stage. Even when you have finished a draft, you may find changes you want to make to an introduction. In truth, every writer must develop his or her own process for getting the writing done, but there are some basic strategies and techniques you can adapt to make your work a little easier, more fulfilling and effective.

Developing Your Writing Process

The final product of a piece of writing is undeniably important, but the emphasis of this course is on developing a writing process that works for you. Some of you may already know what strategies and techniques assist you in your writing. You may already be familiar with prewriting techniques, such as freewriting, clustering, and listing. You may already have a regular writing practice. But the rest of you may need to discover what works through trial and error. Developing individual strategies and techniques that promote painless and compelling writing can take some time. So, be patient.

A Writer’s Process: Ali Hale

Read and examine The Writing Process by Ali Hale. Think of this document as a framework for defining the process in distinct stages: Prewriting, Writing, Revising, Editing, and Publishing. You may already be familiar with these terms. You may recall from past experiences that some resources refer to prewriting as planning and some texts refer to writing as drafting.

What is important to grasp early on is that the act of writing is more than sitting down and writing something. Please avoid the “one and done” attitude, something instructors see all too often in undergraduate writing courses. Use Hale’s essay as your starting point for defining your own process.

A Writer’s Process: Anne Lamott

In the video below, Anne Lamott, a writer of both non-fiction and fiction works, as well as the instructional novel on writing Bird by Bird: Instructions on Writing , discusses her own journey as a writer, including the obstacles she has to overcome every time she sits down to begin her creative process. She will refer to terms such as “the down draft,” “the up draft,” and “the dental draft.”

As you watch, think about how her terms, “down draft,” “up draft,” “dental draft,” work with those presented by Hale’s The Writing Process . What does Lamott mean by these terms? Can you identify with her process or with the one Hale describes? How are they related?

Also, when viewing the interview, pay careful attention to the following timeframe: 11:23 to 27:27 minutes and make a list of tips and strategies you find particularly helpful. Think about how your own writing process fits with what Hale and Lamott have to say. Is yours similar? Different? Is there any new information you have learned that you did not know before exposure to these works?

Provided by : Lumen Learning. Located at : http://lumenlearning.com/ . License : CC BY: Attribution
Authored by : Daryl Smith O' Hare and Susan C. Hines. Provided by : Chadron State College. Project : Kaleidoscope Open Course Initiative. License : CC BY: Attribution
Image: Computer and notebook. Located at : https://unsplash.com/ . License : CC0: No Rights Reserved
A Conversation with Anne Lamott 2007. Provided by : University of California Television (UCTV). Located at : http://youtu.be/PhP5GmybvPM . License : All Rights Reserved . License Terms : Standard YouTube License

The Writing Post

Writing craft: writing as a recursive process.

Authors. Writers. Books. Poems. Literature History.

I used to think that the writing process was as simple as sitting down, typing out a short story or essay on my laptop, giving it a quick review, and then sending it off to a magazine. In my imagination, I pictured editors responding with messages like, “You’re a genius! Here’s $3 billion dollars! You’ve revolutionized the world of writing!” In reality, all I managed to do was irritate a slew of editors at literary magazines (and algorithms that detected the flaws in my writing, which somehow felt even worse).

One of my early mistakes was failing to grasp the type of writing process that was truly needed or understanding that writing is a recursive endeavor. Yes, “recursive” might sound like a ten-dollar word, but it carries significant weight when you’re striving to establish an effective approach to writing. It’s about comprehending the steps a writer must take to be both productive and proficient.

The Process of Repetition

Writing as a recursive process encompasses the writing process itself (prewriting, drafting, revising, and editing). It allows you to revisit previous steps and jump around during a writing project because, as most approaches to academic writing will tell you, these processes flow into one another, creating fluidity between stages. For instance, you may need to return to your drafting stage to enhance your introduction with more refined language, even though you’re in the revising stage.

When we discuss writing as a recursive process, we’re talking about the repetition of the writing process, which can sometimes trap us in the space between the editing and revising stages, endlessly moving sentences around, correcting grammatical issues, and adding new ideas over and over. Yet, this is precisely what we do as writers to create polished, well-crafted work.

Why Is This Important?

It’s one thing to say, “Writing is recursive!” and another to fully understand its implications. Recursive writing means that each step you take in your writing process feeds into other steps. For example, after drafting an essay, you’ll verify facts, and if you find errors, you’ll return to the draft to correct them. In other words, we repeat processes to refine our message.

We must remember that we will always jump between stages. Completing the draft doesn’t mean you’re done drafting, and finishing revising doesn’t guarantee every paragraph is in its ideal place. In essence, writing is rewriting. It’s perfectly acceptable to revisit old steps in the process, from prewriting to drafting to revision, and even to begin again when you feel it’s necessary.

As Nancy Hutchison, associate professor of English at Howard Community College, wisely advises, “Good academic writing takes time. It’s a marathon, not a sprint, and there are many steps to writing well.” This advice holds true for various writing genres, whether it’s academic, fiction, content writing, or any other form. It reminds us that we’re not in a race to finish quickly. We’ve all submitted unfinished writing due to neglecting the revision process, and a key lesson is to remember your writing steps, take breaks, and know that it’s perfectly fine to revisit your writing process.

Works Cited

“Writing as a Process: Writing is Recursive.” Stetson University Writing Program. Web. URL: https://www.stetson.edu/other/writing-center/media/G_Part_3.pdf . Accessed: June 14, 2021.

Hutchison, Nancy. “Recursive Writing Process.” ENGLISH 087 Academic Advanced Writing, Howard Community College, 24 Jan. 2020, pressbooks.howardcc.edu/engl087/chapter/writing-process-recursion/.

Discover more from The Writing Post

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Type your email…

Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
Subscribe Subscribed
Copy shortlink
Report this content
View post in Reader
Manage subscriptions
Collapse this bar

school Campus Bookshelves
menu_book Bookshelves
perm_media Learning Objects
login Login
how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
hub Instructor Commons

Margin Size

Download Page (PDF)
Download Full Book (PDF)
Periodic Table
Physics Constants
Scientific Calculator
Reference & Cite
Tools expand_more
Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

2.5: The Main Stages of the Writing Process

Last updated
Save as PDF
Page ID 7363

$ \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } $

$ \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} $

$ \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}$ $ \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}$

( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) $ \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}$

$ \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}$ $ \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}$

$ \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}$ $ \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}$

$ \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}$

$ \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}$

$ \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}$

$ \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}$

$ \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}$

$ \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}$

$ \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}$

$ \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}$

$ \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}$

$ \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}$ $ \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}$

$ \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}} % arrow$

$ \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}} % arrow$

$ \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } $

$ \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} $

$ \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} $

$ \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} $

$ \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} $

The word “process” itself implies doing things in stages and over time. Applied to writing, this means that as you proceed from the beginning of a writing project through its middle and towards the end, you go through certain definable stages, each of which needs to be completed in order for the whole project to succeed.

Composing is very complex intellectual work consisting of many complex mental activities and processes. As we will see in the next section of this chapter, it is often difficult to say when and where one stage of the writing process ends and the next one begins. However, it is generally agreed that the writing process has at least three discreet stages: invention, revision, and editing. In addition to inventing, revising, and editing, writers who follow the process approach also seek and receive feedback to their drafts from others. It is also important to understand that the writing process is recursive and non-linear. What this means is that a writer may finish initial invention, produce a draft, and then go back to generating more ideas, before revising the text he or she created.

Figure 2.1 - The Writing Process. Source: www.mywritingportfolio.ne t

Invention is what writers do before they produce a first complete draft of their piece. As its name suggests, invention helps writers to come up with material for writing. The process theory states that no writer should be expected to simply sit down and write a complete piece without some kind of preparatory work. The purpose of invention is to explore various directions in which the piece may go and to try different ways to develop material for writing. Note the words “explore” and “try” in the previous sentence. They suggest that not all the material generated during invention final, or even the first draft. To a writer used to product-based composing, this may seem like a waste of time and energy. Why generate more ideas during invention than you can into the paper, they reason?

Remember that your goal during invention is to explore various possibilities for your project. At this point, just about the most dangerous and counter-productive thing you can do as a writer is to “lock in” on one idea, thesis, type of evidence, or detail, and ignore all other possibilities. Such a limited approach is particularly dangerous when applied to research writing. A discussion of that follows in the section of this chapter which is dedicated to the application the process model to research writing. Below, I offer several invention, revision, and editing strategies and activities.

Invention Techniques

These invention strategies invite spontaneity and creativity. Feel free to adjust and modify them as you see fit. They will probably work best for you if you apply them to a specific writing project rather than try them out “for practice’s sake.” As you try them, don’t worry about the shape or even content of your final draft. At this stage, you simply don’t know what that draft is going to look like. You are creating its content as you invent. This is not a complete list of all possible invention strategies. Your teacher and classmates may be able to share other invention ideas with you.

Free-writing

As its name suggests, free writing encourages the writer to write freely and without worrying about the content or shape of the writing. When you free-write, your goal is to generate as much material on the page as possible, no matter what you say or how you say it.

Try to write for five, ten, or even fifteen minutes without checking, censoring, or editing yourself in any way. You should not put your pen or pencil down, or stop typing on the computer, no matter what. If you run out of things to say, repeat “I have nothing to say” or something similar until the next idea pops into your head. Let your mind go, go with the flow, and don’t worry about the end product. Your objective is to create as much text as possible. Don’t even worry about finishing your sentences or separating your paragraphs. You are not writing a draft of your paper. Instead, you are producing raw material for that draft. Later on, you just might find a gem of an idea in that raw material which you can develop into a complete draft. Also don’t worry if anyone will be able to read what your have written—most likely you will be the only reader of your text. If your teacher asks you to share your free writing with other students, you can explain what you have written to your group mates as you go along.

Brainstorming

When brainstorming, you list as quickly as possible all thoughts and ideas which are connected, however loosely, to the topic of your writing. As with free writing, you should not worry about the shape or structure of your writing. Your only concern should be to write as long a list of possibilities as you can. As you brainstorm, try not to focus your writing radar too narrowly, on a single aspect of your topic or a single question. The broader you cast your brainstorming net, the better because a large list of possibilities will give you a wealth of choices when time comes to compose your first draft. Your teacher may suggest how many items to have on your brainstorming list. I usually ask my students to come up with at least ten to twelve items in a five to ten minute long brainstorming session, more if possible.

Mind-Mapping

Mind-mapping, which is also known as webbing or clustering, invites you to create a visual representation of your writing topic or of the problem you are trying to solve through your writing and research. The usefulness of mind-mapping as an invention techniques has been recognized by professionals in many disciplines, with at least one software company designing a special computer program exclusively for creating elaborate mind maps.

Here is how mind-mapping works. Write your topic or questions in the middle of a blank page, or type it in the middle of a computer screen, and think about any other topics or subtopics related to this main topic or question. Then branch out of the center connecting the central idea of your mind map to the other ones. The result should like a spider’s web. The figure is a mind-map I made for the first draft of the chapter of this book dedicated to rhetoric.

This invention strategy also asks the writer to create a visual representation of his or topic and is particularly useful for personal writing projects and memoirs. In such projects, memories and recollections, however vague and uncertain, are often starting points for writing. Instead of writing about your memories, this invention strategy invites you to draw them. The advantage of this strategy is that it allows the writer not only to restore these memories in preparation for writing, but also to reflect upon them. As you know by now, one of the fundamental principles of the process approach to writing is that meaning is created as the writer develops the piece from draft to draft. Drawing elements of your future project may help you create such meaning. I am not particularly good at visual arts, so I will not subject you to looking at my drawings. Instead, I invite you to create your own.

Outlining can be a powerful invention tool because it allows writers to generate ideas and to organize them in a systematic manner. In a way, outlining is similar to mind mapping as it allows you to break down main ideas and points into smaller ones. The difference between mind maps and outlines is, of course, the fact that the former provides a visual representation of your topic while the latter gives you a more linear, textual one. If you like to organize your thoughts systematically as you compose, a good outline can be a useful resource when you begin drafting.

However, it is extremely important to observe two conditions when using outlining as your main invention strategy. The first is to treat your outline as a flexible plan for writing and nothing more. The key word is “flexible.” Your outline is not a rigid set of points which you absolutely must cover in your paper, and the structure of your outline, with all its points and sub-points, does not predetermine the structure of your paper. The second condition follows from the first. If, in the process of writing the paper, you realize that your current outline does not suit you anymore, change it or discard it. Do not follow it devotedly, trying to fit your writing into what your outline wants it to be.

So, again, the outline is you flexible plan for writing, not a canon that you have to follow at all cost. It is hard for writers to create a “perfect” or complete outline before writing because the meaning of a piece takes shape during composing, not before. It is difficult, if not impossible, to know what you are going to say in your writing unless and until you begin to say it. Outlining may help you in planning your first draft, but it should not determine it.

Keeping a journal or a writer’s notebook

Keeping a journal or a writer’s notebook is another powerful invention strategy. Keeping a writer’s journal can work regardless of the genre you are working in. Journals and writer’s notebooks are popular among writers of fiction and creative non-fiction. But they also have a huge potential for researching writers because keeping a journal allows you not only to record events and details, but also to reflect on them through writing. In the chapter of this book dedicated to researching in academic disciplines, I discuss one particular type of writing journal called the double-entry journal. If you decide to keep a journal or a writer’s notebook as an invention strategy, keep in mind the following principles:

Write in your journal or notebook regularly.
Keep everything you write—you never know when you may need or want to use it in your writing.
Write about interesting events, observations, and thoughts.
Reflect on what you have written. Reflection allows you to make that leap from simple observation to making sense of what you have observed.
Frequently re-read your entries.

It is hard to overestimate the importance of reading as an invention strategy. As you can learn from the chapters on rhetoric and on reading, writing is a social process that never occurs in a vacuum. To get ideas for writing of your own, you need to be familiar with ideas of others. Reading is one of the best, if not the best way, to get such material. Reading is especially important for research writing. For a more in-depth discussion of the relationship between reading and writing and for specific activities designed to help you to use reading for writing, see Chapter 3 of this book dedicated to reading.

Examining your Current Knowledge

The best place to start looking for a research project topic is to examine your own interests, passions, and hobbies. What topics, events, people, or natural phenomena, or stories interest, concern you, or make you passionate? What have you always wanted to find out more about or explore in more depth?

Looking into the storehouse of your knowledge and life experiences will allow you to choose a topic for your research project in which you are genuinely interested and in which you will,therefore, be willing to invest plenty of time, effort, and enthusiasm. Simultaneously with being interesting and important to you, your research topic should, of course, interest your readers. As you have learned from the chapter on rhetoric, writers always write with a purpose and for a specific audience.

Therefore, whatever topic you choose and whatever argument you will build about it through research should provoke response in your readers. And while almost any topic can be treated in an original and interesting way, simply choosing the topic that interests you, the writer, is not, in itself, a guarantee of success of your research project.

Here is some advice on how to select a promising topic for your next research project. As you think about possible topics for your paper, remember that writing is a conversation between you and your readers. Whatever subject you choose to explore and write about has to be something that is interesting and important to them as well as to you. Remember kairos, or the ability to "be in the right place at the right time, which we discussed in Chapter 1.

When selecting topics for research, consider the following factors:

Your existing knowledge about the topic
What else you need or want to find out about the topic
What questions about or aspects of the topic are important not only for you but for others around you.
Resources (libraries, internet access, primary research sources, and so on) available to you in order to conduct a high quality investigation of your topic.

Read about and “around” various topics that interest you. As I argue later on in this chapter, reading is a powerful invention tool capable of teasing out subjects, questions, and ideas which would not have come to mind otherwise. Reading also allows you to find out what questions, problems, and ideas are circulating among your potential readers, thus enabling you to better and quicker enter the conversation with those readers through research and writing.

Explore " Writing Activity 2B: Generating Topics " in the "Writing Activities" section of this chapter.

If you have an idea of the topic or issue you want to study, try asking the following questions

Why do I care about this topic?
What do I already know or believe about this topic?
How did I receive my knowledge or beliefs (personal experiences, stories of others, reading, and so on)?
What do I want to find out about this topic?
Who else cares about or is affected by this topic? In what ways and why?
What do I know about the kinds of things that my potential readers might want to learn about it?
Where do my interests about the topic intersect with my readers’ potential interests, and where they do not?

Which topic or topics has the most potential to interest not only you, the writer, but also your readers?

Designing Research Questions

Assuming that you were able to select the topic for your next research project, it is not time to design some research questions. Forming specific and relevant research questions will allow you to achieve three important goals:

Direct your research from the very beginning of the project
Keep your research focused and on track
Help you find relevant and interesting sources

essay writing is a recursive process discuss

Writing Process: Writing

Getting to know your writing process.

Developing an effective writing process has a huge impact on the quality of your writing. Sometimes we think that improving writing means finding the perfect article or having some divine inspiration, but it’s amazing how much our writing improves simply by adjusting our writing process to work better for us.

Please scroll to continue reading in order, or click a heading below to jump straight to that section.

Process is individual and recursive

A good writing process will be tailored to one’s individual learning style. Do you work better in the morning or at night? Do you work better alone or with friends? Do you write some things on a computer and some on paper? Do you give yourself enough time for your ideas to properly develop?

If you approach your individual process with curiosity and flexibility, insights await. For example, maybe you enjoy lots of background noise when producing your first rough draft, but silence is better for editing. If you feel your usual process isn't working, try to experiment with changing variables: reflect on what works and what doesn't.

The writing process is also recursive. This means that the steps of the process don't unfold in a clean, precise order. Instead, writers move between steps, leaping forward, circling back and repeating them as needed. In fact, you might find it more helpful to think of the writing process as a buffet of writing activities rather than a rigid sequence.

When you chart in order the activities any given writer engages in to produce an essay, the resulting visual resembles more of a spiderweb than a tidy procedural diagram.

Understanding

A logical starting place for writing any assignment is understanding. Before you begin to do anything, after all, you need to know what it is you're being asked to do!

First, mark the deadline in your calendar.
Next, closely read the description of your assessment. Does it ask you to describe , discuss , explain , argue or some other verb?
Look closely at the structure you are meant to model, and make note of any requirements related to evidence and content (i.e., authors you need to reference, theories you need to incorporate, and so on).

If you need more information to plan your work, ask your instructors or tutors early. As you begin to understand the task, think about adding your own deadlines for specific tasks in your calendar as well: maybe have a first draft ready one week early, or an outline ready by the end of the week.

Tip: Use the 'Verbs' tab of our Understanding the Assignment guide for help analysing assignment aims.

Once you’ve got a good understanding of the task, it is time for ideas. The invention stage is not the time to say no. It is the time to generate ideas without judgment. The benefit of getting a bunch of ideas on the page is that you can avoid pursuing the first idea that comes to your head. Often, the better ideas are waiting behind our first thoughts.

Some people prefer to make lists. Some prefer to structure lists into outlines . Others like to map out connections between ideas visually with colourful mind maps, which can be drawn longhand or built in a mind mapping app or website. Find a way that works for you.

Research question(s)

Whether or not we write it in our essays, each piece of academic writing is answering a question. If we can tailor that question to our specific task, it helps us maintain our focus as we research and write. Before beginning the research portion, turn your ideas into questions. That way, you can seek specific answers.

A good research question won’t have a simple, single answer. A good research question will offer many opportunities to discuss different perspectives, but still stay focused on a specific purpose for the text.

Researching

Good research is focused . Finding good resources demands a knowledge of online databases and library materials. Develop your research skills , and don't hesitate to seek out a librarian to help navigate the wealth of resources the library provides.
Good research is organised . Don’t just amass a pile of .pdfs. As you assess their quality for your purposes, make notes, name the files, and keep track of them in subfolders. As you read through them, keep notes in a searchable format, perhaps via thematic notetaking or the annotated bibliography method. Save your future self from wasted time and frustration by focusing your research and keeping track of your thoughts on what you find.

Planning, Refining, Reflecting

This is where things are about to get more complicated. Take a step back and think about where you are headed with your research and if it really fits the task. Are you still on topic? Have you found new, exciting material that raises better research questions? Pause to plan and revisit your ideas. Transfer your research into an outline or some other sort of plan. This is why it helps to give yourself time.

The rough draft can be a mess: explore our guide on rough drafting to learn more. This is the first translation of planning into prose, so don’t feel any pressure to get it perfect on the first try. Don’t overthink. It's called a rough draft for a reason!

If writing anxiety and/or perfectionism make it difficult for you to get words down without picking over and rethinking them, consider trying a website that prevents you from deleting your text. These sites allow you to type as much as you want, but you can't erase any of the words you have written: a very helpful tool to quiet your inner critic, and get on with it!

You can also try a technique called freewriting . The simplest version is to set a timer for five or ten minutes, and then write nonstop until the timer dings. No pausing, no stopping to ponder your next point: your pen on the paper (or your fingers on the keyboard) should be moving nonstop. You can stumble into some great ideas this way! The key is to reflect on and sort through your freewriting after the timer dings, identifying promising ideas or phrases (and ignoring the rest).

Editing or revising

The editing or revision process is when all the elements start working together as you write and refine, then re-write and re-refine. You should ultimately be clarifying and supporting your main points in a recursive process. Go back to the writing prompt, revisit your notes, share your draft with someone to read, ask friends about your argument, go for a walk, build a reverse outline , question the validity of your claims, re-organise your points, do another search for articles. Do whatever it takes to turn the cloud of thoughts and ideas into a coherent piece of work.

Proofreading

Whereas the editing or revision stage is concerned with the 'big picture', such as how evidence is used to support your thesis statement, proofreading is the time to polish the fine details of your work. Ensure the 'small picture' concerns are addressed before you submit. Our 'Refine Your Writing: Better Proofreading' learning sequence will equip you with a range of strategies to improve your skills; here are some highlights:

Give yourself the time and space you need in order to read your finished paper with fresh eyes .
Try reading your work aloud or having a friend read it to you. The 'read aloud' option in your word processor also works. This technique helps you catch unneeded repetition, awkward phrasing and punctuation issues.
Be sure your points are clearly stated and not hiding behind overly academic style.
Use your subject area's style guide and online tools like Cite Them Right to check your reference formatting and consistency.

Only you will know when your paper is completed and ready for submission. Be sure to do the following:

Meet your deadline.
Name and format the file according to submission guidelines.
After uploading, be sure the appropriate confirmation screen is shown.
Save a copy of your final essay for future reference (your university OneDrive account is a good storage option).

This is only one version of a writing process. Each writer should work towards a healthy, effective way to use each of these steps or activities to accomplish a successful piece of writing. Once you have this knowledge, the larger question becomes one of planning, continuing curiosity and reflection. Embrace opportunities to expand or redefine your process as you encounter new academic challenges.

Last Updated: Apr 30, 2024 2:09 PM
URL: https://library.soton.ac.uk/writing_process

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

41 Writing Is Recursive

Chris Blankenship

What does Pinker mean when he says “recursively,” though?

So, what does recursion have to do with writing?

There are many ways to think about the writing process, but here’s one that my students have said makes sense to them. It involves five separate ways of thinking about a writing task:

Invention: Coming up with ideas.

Research: Finding new information.

Drafting: Creating the text.

Revision: Literally, seeing the text again.

Editing: Looking at the surface level of the text.

On the other hand, Sommers also researched how experienced writers approach a writing task. She found that their writing process is different from that of student writers:

For example, a colleague and I wrote a chapter for a book on working conditions at colleges, a topic we’re interested in.

When we started, we had to come up with an idea for the text by talking through our experiences and deciding on a purpose for the text. [Invention]
Although we both knew something about the topic already, we read articles and talked to experts to learn more about it. [Research]
From that research, we decided that our original idea didn’t quite fit with the research that was out there already, so we made some changes to the big idea. [Invention]
After that, we sat down and, over several sessions on different days, created a draft of our text. [Drafting]
When we read through the text, we discovered that the order of the information didn’t make as much sense as we had first thought, so we moved around some paragraphs, making changes to those paragraphs to help the flow of the new order. [Revision]
After that, we sent the rough draft to the editors of the book for feedback. When we got the chapter back, the editors commented that our topic didn’t quite fit the theme of the book, so, using that feedback, we changed the focus of the ideas. [Invention]
Then we changed the text to reflect those new ideas. [Revision]
We also got feedback from peer reviewers who pointed out that one part of the text was a little confusing, so we had to learn more about the ideas in that section. [Research]
We changed the text to reflect that new understanding. [Revision and Editing]
After the editors were satisfied with those revisions, we proofread the article and sent it off for final approval. [Editing]

“Revision Strategies of Student Writers and Experienced Adult Writers” in College Composition and Communication 31.4, 378-88 ↵

Share This Book

In order to continue enjoying our site, we ask that you confirm your identity as a human. Thank you very much for your cooperation.

Recursivity in source-based writing: a process analysis

Open access
Published: 26 October 2023

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

Christian Tarchi ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-4013-4794 1 ,
Ruth Villalón 2 ,
Nina Vandermeulen 3 ,
Lidia Casado-Ledesma 1 &
Anna Paola Fallaci 1

978 Accesses

Explore all metrics

In university settings, writing argumentative essays from reading conflicting source texts is a common task for students. In performing this synthesis task, they must deal with conflicting claims about a controversial issue as they develop their own positions. Argumentative synthesis is characterized by writers’ back-and-forth moves between reading source texts and writing their own texts—a self-regulatory process that can be termed recursivity. The present study investigated the recursive behavior of Italian university students as they wrote argumentative syntheses while reading conflicting sources. The 43 graduate students participating in the study read four source texts on a controversial topic, evaluation in academe, with the goal of writing an argumentative essay. Reading of the sources was studied through a think-aloud procedure, and recursivity in writing the syntheses was recorded through Inputlog software. Comparisons were made between 22 high-recursive and 22 low recursive writers for the quality of their argumentative essays and for the critical strategies that they had used in reading the sources. Descriptive and nonparametic analyses produced the following three findings: (1) The strategies most employed in prereading were all related to synthesis-related activities: voicing opinion, expressing agreement, and expressing doubts. (2) Recursivity occurred most often in the middle of the synthesis process, as writers developed their arguments, instead of at the beginning or end. (3) High-recursive writers surpassed low-recursive writers by producing argumentative essays of higher quality and obtained better recall scores. They also employed more critical processing relevant to synthesis when reading the sources. This study provides insight on how recursivity is involved in argumentative writing but still there is need for further research.

Learning paths in synthesis writing: Which learning path contributes most to which learning outcome?

Examining the value of a scaffolded critique framework to promote argumentative and explanatory writings within an argument-based inquiry approach.

Collaborative writing of argumentative syntheses by low-performing undergraduate writers: explicit instruction and practice

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Composing texts based on the reading of multiple sources, commonly known as synthesis writing, has piqued the curiosity of the educational and scientific community in recent times. This heightened interest can be attributed to both its frequent requirement across various educational levels (Marttunen & Kiili, 2022 ) and the cognitive challenges it poses for students. Studies in the field of synthesis writing have highlighted the significant learning opportunities inherent in this type of task. The process of reading, rereading, integrating, organizing, and extending diverse source texts requires a profound transformation of knowledge (Solé et al., 2013 ; Spivey & King, 1989 ). However, it is not surprising that for students tackling these activities poses a significant challenge, given the high cognitive demands involved (Mateos et al., 2018 ; Solé et al., 2013 ). Students are often faced with multiple-text comprehension tasks with the goal of producing an argumentative essay. When this learning situation occurs, students have to generate a particular type of argumentative writing: an argumentative synthesis (Mateos et al., 2018 ). Argumentative synthesis is a hybrid task that implies the critical use of reading and writing. Indeed, when synthesizing texts, writers comprehend such sources and write an essay based on the information read, returning to source texts for further comprehension if necessary. Producing a synthesis requires students to read and reread the texts (Nelson, 2008 ; Vandermeulen et al., 2020c ), both to identify relevant information and to elaborate and integrate it into the writing; i.e., synthesis writing is closely related to the recursion process.

Recursivity, which means returning to and repeating a procedure, has become a focus of research in synthesis writing since this is a central cognitive process in this type of activities (Nelson & King, 2023 ; Solé et al., 2013 ). The concept of recursion is widely known in the field of writing research. This recognition dates back to Emig’s pioneering study in 1971 (Emig, 1971 ), which demonstrated that the writing process does not follow a strict, linear sequence comprising only the planning, writing, and revision phases. Rather, writers follow a recursive pattern, repeatedly returning to subprocesses such as planning or revision at different points in the composition process (Flower & Hayes, 1981 ; Perl, 1980 ). However, for research on writing from sources, the term recursion is used differently.

In the field of writing from sources, recursivity involves an iterative process of “back and forth” between the reading of sources and the writing itself (Vandermeulen et al., 2023 ). It is a self-regulatory cognitive process which makes it possible to monitor the writer’s behavior, in order to introduce the relevant changes in the planning, textualization and evaluation phases (Mateos et al., 2018 ; Segev-Miller, 2007 ). Throughout the writing process, authors constantly revisit and reassess their ideas, arguments, and language choices, seeking coherence and effectiveness. This iterative process allows them to identify weaknesses, address inconsistencies, and refine their communication.

Despite the importance of recursivity in critical reading and writing, to date the studies focusing on this behavior are extremely scarce. In this study we aim to contribute to the literature on argumentative synthesis by investigating the relevance of recursivity and its interplay with critical reading processes.

Source-based writing

Writing activities in the academic context can take many forms. Students may be asked to write opinion essays on specific content, scientific reports, summaries of book chapters, etc. One task that stands out for its frequency and the difficulty it entails for students is source-based writing. Source-based writing requires the writer to read different sources and to synthesize information from them in response to an objective; for example, to develop a comprehensive view of a controversial topic (Braine, 1995 ; Weston-Sementelli et al., 2018 ). To adequately develop these writing tasks, students not only have to master different writing skills, but they also have to be proficient in reading and comprehending the different sources provided. Composing a high-quality text based on reading sources depends on both reading and writing skills and, therefore, there is an overlap between the processes of comprehension and language production (Spivey, 1990 ). This interdependence between the reading and writing processes (Graham et al., 2020 ) requires reading effectively in order to identify relevant information for the composition process and, in relation to the writing process, knowing how to incorporate this material into the text being created (Hirvela, 2004 ).

Argumentative synthesis writing

Synthesis writing is a type of source-based writing (Vandermeulen et al., 2023 ) and, therefore, it is a hybrid task (Spivey & King, 1989 ) that requires the combined use of reading and writing. Regarding reading processes, students need to evaluate the trustworthiness and relevance of the source-texts, identify the main perspective, identify and evaluate the strength of the main arguments (and counter-arguments), monitor their own comprehension and connect the new information with their prior knowledge and experiences. In other words, students need to read strategically. In addition, and because they are reading different sources, students need to perform the same actions across texts, to identify whether they hold compatible or opposing perspectives, and the extent to which they overlap in information provided and arguments discussed. Regarding writing processes, students need to plan, compose and revise (Hayes, 2012 ). In short, synthesis writing is an epistemic and a complex task (Segev-Miller, 2004 ) that requires the implementation of processes of selection, organization and connection of information related to different sources (Spivey, 1997 ), as well as intratextual (within one text) and intertextual integration (between two or more sources) processes in order to write a document with an original structure and content (Segev-Miller, 2007 ). To do so, a reader should consult the sources while writing his/her own text.

One aspect to take into account is that syntheses can be elaborated from sources that present complementary or conflicting information on a topic. Writing a synthesis from sources that present conflicting information can be understood as a particular type of argumentative writing, since it is necessary to consider the arguments and counterarguments related to the different perspectives (Mateos et al., 2018 ).

Addressing alternative perspectives on the controversial issue is critical to effective argumentation in argumentative synthesis writing; activities which are becoming increasingly important in the education of elementary and secondary students (e.g., De la Paz & Felton, 2010 ), as well as college students (e.g., Granado-Peinado et al., 2019 ; Luna et al., 2023 ; Mateos et al., 2018 ). In arguing personal opinion on a particular topic, different strategies can be implemented. A rebuttal strategy may be employed in case the arguments corresponding to the undefended position are considered erroneous or insufficiently justified. Another strategy may be to support one of the perspectives after assessing and weighing the arguments linked to the two positions. writers can point out the strengths and weaknesses of alternative perspectives and also refute positions and assertions with which they disagree (Reznitskaya et al., 2009 ; Toulmin, 1958 ). However, the emphasis can also be placed on intertextual integration processes when reading texts that address conflicting topics. In this regard, although rebuttal and weighing are well-recognized strategies in argumentation, Nussbaum and Schraw ( 2007 ) added another strategy in their theoretical framework concerning the integration of arguments and counterarguments: compromise/conciliation between alternative views. In this last strategy defined, the writer tries to propose a conciliatory solution that brings together the positive aspects of the two opposing positions. Importantly, even though all strategies described by Nussbaum and Schraw are employed in synthesizing, the authors use the term “synthesis” for one specific strategy: the development of a “conciliatory solution” to the problem being addressed. Moreover, Nussbaum and Schraw use the terms “argument” and “counterargument” for what many writing researchers would call “claim” and “counterclaim,” while defining the term “argument” as a full argumentative text.

A rebuttal strategy may be employed in case the arguments corresponding to the undefended position are considered erroneous or insufficiently justified. Another strategy may be to support one of the perspectives after assessing and weighing the arguments linked to the two positions. The third and last strategy defined by these authors would be the strategy of synthesis, in which the writer tries to propose a conciliatory solution that brings together the positive aspects of the two opposing positions. Importantly, even though all strategies described by Nussbaum and Schraw are employed in synthesizing, the authors use the term “synthesis” for one specific strategy: the development of a “conciliatory solution” to the problem being addressed. Moreover, Nussbaum and Schraw use the terms “argument” and “counterargument” for what many writing researchers would call “claim” and “counterclaim,” while defining the term “argument” as a full argumentative text. Furthermore, it is worth noting that while Nussbaum and Schraw refer to a synthesis strategy, it could also be called “compromise/conciliation between alternative views”. However, in the field of research on argumentative synthesis writing from multiple sources, the term “synthesis” is commonly used to refer to this specific procedure.

Several studies have been conducted in the field of argumentative synthesis writing from sources with conflicting information (e.g., Casado-Ledesma et al., 2021 ; Granado-Peinado et al., 2023 ; Luna et al., 2023 ; Mateos et al., 2018 ). All these studies share a common feature, which is the design and implementation of intervention programs aimed at enhancing students’ competence in writing argumentative syntheses. In doing so, they all draw upon the theoretical framework of Nussbaum and Schraw regarding strategies for integrating arguments and counterarguments. With regard to our research, an argumentative synthesis writing task was implemented, that is, participants were asked to express an opinion on a topic and support it with the arguments and counter-arguments identified in the texts. Being that, our analytical approach also drew upon Nussbaum and Schraw’s proposal regarding intertextual integration strategies. Besides, we adopted two process-tracing approaches: think-aloud procedures (Afflerbach & Cho, 2009 ) learn about reading strategies employed when writers read source texts after being informed that they will soon write argumentative texts from conflicting sources, and input logs (Leijten & Van Waes, 2013 ) to learn about recursivity during writing. We also used two product-oriented measures: text evaluation of the argumentative syntheses, with major attention to intertextual integration as in past studies in the field (Casado-Ledesma et al., 2021 ; Granado-Peinado et al., 2023 ; Luna et al., 2023 ; Mateos et al., 2018 ) and a delayed recall measure for addressing deep comprehension.

Recursivity in source-based writing

Recursivity when writing has received some attention from research. By recursivity we refer to the number of switches between sources and the writer’s text document. Writers may go back to sources at different stages of the writing processes, namely when planning, composing or revising. Weak writers tend to follow a linear process, from reading to writing, which in turn produces low-quality texts (Fidalgo et al., 2014 ). Strong writers go back and forth from sources to their own text several times for, hypothetically, strategic reasons (Mateos & Solé, 2009 ; Solé et al., 2013 ).

The relevance of recursivity when writing is grounded in the levels-of-processing theoretical framework (Craik, 2002 ; Craik & Lockhart, 1972 ). According to this theory, people process information at different levels of depth, which are generally not processed linearly. Rather, people re-circulate information in their memory to further analyze it. Of course, this process depends on the quality of the working memory: the trace may get lost once people proceed to process different information. The repeated presentation of stimuli could support this process. Thus, recursivity exposes learners over and over again to the same information, which can be processed at different levels.

Past studies have investigated whether recursivity is associated with argumentative synthesis writing. Mateos and Solé ( 2009 ) analyzed the written products of students from different educational levels who had received a synthesis task from their teachers. They found that older students (university level) implemented more often a recursive rather than linear approach to the task than younger students. This finding was partially confirmed by Vandermeulen et al.’s study ( 2020d ), showing that higher grade students switched more frequently between sources and their own text, at least in the beginning of the writing process. Moreover, the studies of Solé et al. ( 2013 ), with secondary students, and Du and List ( 2020 ), with undergraduate students, also support the idea that better quality products are related to more recursive patterns while reading multiple texts. Vandermeulen et al. ( 2020c ) studied source use in upper-secondary students’ argumentative and informative source-based writing. Results showed that recursion was most frequent in the middle part of the writing process (as compared to the beginning and end phase), and that students switched to the sources more frequently when writing an argumentative text than when writing a narrative text. Additionally, these authors related source use to the quality of the text. A positive correlation between recursivity in the first phase of the process and text quality was found, while recursivity in the last phase of the process correlated negatively with text quality.

Process analysis in reading and writing

Most research on reading and writing has almost exclusively focused on the products of these activities (e.g., reading comprehension, recall, written text quality, coherence, and the like). At the same time, several scholars have turned their attention towards reading and writing processes, developing research methodologies able to provide us an insight into the students’ metacognitive activity.

The think-aloud methodology has been used to address reading in writing from sources (Du & List, 2020 ; Mateos et al., 2018 ; Solé et al., 2013 ). This methodology helps researchers to identify cognitive and metacognitive processes implemented during a learning task (Ericsson & Simon, 1998 ; Pressley & Afflerbach, 1995 ). When performing a task, such as reading one or more texts, participants are asked to “think aloud”, that is to voice any thought they have while reading, without filtering any thought. Thinking aloud while performing a task, rather than before (prospective think-aloud) or after (retrospective think-aloud) is considerate preferable as it addresses two limitations of these options, respectively people do not do what they say they do and people do not always recall accurately what they have done (Hu & Gao, 2017 ). Moreover, it provides direct access to reading processes, whereas other techniques, such as log-data or eye-tracking, indirectly infer metacognitive processes from behavior. Recent studies have demonstrated the substantial neutrality of think-aloud on target processes (Bannert & Mengelkamp, 2008 ; Tarchi, 2021 ).

One way to access cognitive and metacognitive processes such as recursivity during writing is through the use of keystroke logging tools such as Inputlog (Leijten & Van Waes, 2013 ). Inputlog makes it possible to observe the writing process unobtrusively as it runs in the background of a familiar word processor. Inputlog records (or logs) every keystroke, mouse movement, and window change. All the logged writing process activities are time stamped. The log files can be analyzed within Inputlog from different perspectives: fluency, pause, revision, and - of particular interest when studying recursivity - source use (Vandermeulen et al., 2020b ). Studying the dynamics of the writing process using Inputlog allows us to understand the complexity of writing as a process; however, the conclusions that can be derived from the records are inferential and establishing a direct link between keystrokes and cognitive/metacognitive activities is often not evident (Galbraith & Baaijen, 2019 ). It is therefore advisable to complement this method with others that directly capture the cognitive/metacognitive activity of the subject when performing the task (Wengelin et al., 2019 ).

The present study

Recursivity seems deeply involved in source-based writing tasks, such as argumentative synthesis writing. It may help to connect reading and writing processes and to re-introduce relevant information in the students’ working memory as they proceed in the writing task. However, it is still unclear whether recursivity is associated with strategic processes when going back to sources. Moreover, it is unclear to what extent recursivity is associated with argumentative synthesis performance. These aspects led us to propose the current research, through which we aimed to learn more about writers engaging in an argumentative synthesis task: (a) the strategies they employ in reading the source texts, (b) the recursivity that occurs in their writing of argumentative syntheses, and (c) the quality of the argumentative syntheses that they produce, especially intertextual integration. We were also interested in differences between high and low recursive writers in terms of their reading strategies, patterns of recursivity, and quality of their syntheses. In this study, university student writers read and wrote on the controversial topic of evaluation of education; specifically, about the advantages and disadvantages of standardized student assessment and the evaluation of teachers’ professional practice. Thus, the objectives of this research were as follows:

To describe recursivity behavior (identified through keystroke logging) in university students while reading conflicting sources and while writing argumentative synthesis.

To compare high- versus low-recursive writers on the quality of argumentative essays and the recall of the sources.

To compare high- versus low-recursive writers on strategic behavior, assessed by a think-aloud protocol.

Based on past evidence, studies suggest that writing performances of students in synthesis tasks are still suboptimal, even at the higher education level, and that recursivity is may not found in the behavior of many subjects with less experienced (e.g., secondary school level, see Vandermeulen et al., 2020c ; undergraduate students, Tarchi & Villalón, 2022 ). However, in our study the participants were postgraduate students and the task demanded the use of a significant number of sources, so we expected a moderately higher level of recursivity. Moreover, we hypothesized that recursivity is associated with higher quality in argumentative synthesis written essays. In particular, recursivity should be associated with a higher level of intertextual integration. Moreover, we hypothesized that recursivity would be associated with cognitive and metacognitive strategies while reading sources. In other words, we expected for high-recursive students to write more integrated essays and to be more strategic when reading then low-recursive students.

A recall measure was also included in the research design to investigate the impact of recursivity on retention and depth of processing. In this way, we could investigate whether recursivity influences the way sources are elaborated, besides the quality of students’ written products. Recall allows to assess students’ representation and long-term retention of the text content. Valid inferences, rather than literal comprehension, is a strong index for depth of comprehension, as it represents the links students did between text content and prior knowledge when reading (Diakidoy et al., 2015 ; Tarchi & Villalón, 2021 ).

The following variables were also assessed: perceived prior knowledge, prior beliefs, and need for cognition. These three variables have been found connected with argumentative synthesis writing (see Dai & Wang, 2007 ; Tarchi & Villalón, 2021 ) and may be associated with recursivity. Students with low perceived prior knowledge may struggle in strategically approaching the task and proceed more linearly. Students with skewed prior beliefs may find it unnecessary to process belief-inconsistent texts. Students with low levels of need for cognition may be not so engaged in a complex task such as argumentative synthesis.

As in much of the multi-text reading research (e.g., List & Alexander, 2020 ; Schoor et al., 2023 ), we divided the task into a reading phase and a written production phase. However, since synthesis writing is a hybrid task, we must acknowledge that much composing was, no doubt, occurring as students first encountered the sources during the reading phase of the study.

Participants

Forty-three university students participated voluntarily in the study (13 males, 29 females, one preferred not to declare gender; age mean = 23.9 ± 2.04). All participants were enrolled in a Master’s degree program in Educational Psychology. All participants were Italian and spoke Italian as their primary language. Data was collected anonymously (the participants included a personalized code in each task). The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Florence (Italy).

Different variables related to the participants were assessed; specifically perceived prior knowledge and prior beliefs about the topics addressed in the source texts, as well as need for cognition. Perceived prior knowledge was evaluated through an item (“What is your level of knowledge on the topic of evaluation in school”?) to be rated on a scale from 1 (minimum) to 6 (maximum). Prior beliefs were assessed through an 8-item questionnaire including four items reporting a pro-evaluation stance ( e.g., it is necessarily to evaluate teaching quality ) and four items reporting an against-evaluation stance ( e.g., There is no sufficiently well-founded consensus on what constitutes good teaching practices to create an evaluation system ). The four against-evaluation items were reverse coded. The composite score was obtained by adding up all the ratings: the higher the score, the more pro-evaluation the beliefs were. The reliability of the scale was adequate (α = 0.71). Need for cognition (Cacioppo & Petty, 1982 ) was assessed using an 18-item questionnaire ( e.g., I like tasks that require little reflection once they have been learnt ). Participants scored each item on a 5-point Likert scale (from 1 = completely false to 5 = completely true). The reliability of the scale was adequate (α = 0.87).

Source texts

We used four texts previously employed in studies about argumentative synthesis writing (e.g., Granado-Peinado et al., 2019 ; Mateos et al., 2018 ). The texts discussed the topic of how to enhance the quality of teaching and learning in the school system.

Two texts addressed the topic of teachers’ evaluation; namely, the advantages and disadvantages of conducting an evaluation of teachers’ professional practice, in order to improve the quality of instructional processes (one of the texts addressed the advantages, and the other, the disadvantages). The text in favor of teachers’ evaluation received the name of “Improving the quality of teaching” (599 words) and presented arguments supporting the use of teachers’ evaluation to improve teaching quality. The text against teachers’ evaluation was titled “Good intentions, bad outcomes” (594 words), and included the problems regarding the implementation of instructors’ evaluation.

The other two texts dealt with the topic of student assessment, through standardized and external performance tests, one taking a positive position and the other taking a negative position. The text related to the advantages of students’ evaluation received the title of “Students ‘assessment and education quality” (502 words) and included arguments supporting the use of students’ performance evaluation as a way to improve the quality of educational processes at school. The text related to the disadvantages of students’ evaluation was named “The performance evaluation trap” (612 words), and it included arguments related to the difficulty of deriving improvements in education from these standardized and external evaluations.

The original texts were written in Spanish, adapted by the second author based on texts used in previous studies (Authors, XXXX), so prior to the implementation of the study they were translated into Italian. Cultural adaptability to the Italian educational context was ensured by the first author. Texts had similar readability scores (calculated through the Gulpease, a legibility index for Italian, range 0-100): “Assessment and quality of teaching” (Gulpease index = 45), “The performance evaluation trap” (Gulpease index = 47), “Improving the quality of teaching” (Gulpease index = 43), “Good intentions, bad outcomes” (Gulpease index = 48). Overall, texts were balanced by length, difficulty and number of supporting arguments (seven each text). Excerpts from texts are included in the Supplementary Material A .

To aim our objectives, the following procedure was followed. Firstly, the participants were asked to fill in a questionnaire including an assessment of individual variables and demographic information. Secondly, participants were asked to perform a source-based writing task. They were asked to read four texts on a controversial topic. While reading, the participants were asked to think-aloud. Then, participants were asked to write on a personal computer an argumentative essay based on the sources that they had just read. They were asked to write the essay (with access to sources) while keystroke logging software Inputlog was working in the background. Finally, a week later, they completed a free recall task.

The reading-writing task was conducted online with the direct supervision of an experienced researcher. Prior to the experimental session, students were: (1) instructed how to think-aloud, (2) asked to practice thinking-aloud with two texts provided by the researcher, (3) asked to send a sample of the think-aloud to the researcher. Finally, they received feedback on their think-aloud practice. Then, students were: (1) instructed how to install Inputlog on their device, (2) asked to practice starting and ending the writing sessions with Inputlog, (3) and asked to send a sample of the output to the researcher. Finally, they received feedback on their think-aloud practice. Think-aloud and Inputlog practice sessions were all well performed by the participants on their first attempt. In the experimental session, students were asked to work in a quiet environment and perform the task without interruptions and in the same session. The researcher was available for an online meeting throughout their session for any issue. First, students received the four texts and were asked to read while thinking-aloud. Participants recorded their think-alouds and sent them to the researcher. Immediately after the task, students activated Inputlog and performed the writing task. As soon as they had finished, they were asked to submit the Inputlog output to the researcher. The exchange of materials between students and the researcher was performed through a learning management system. All participants completed the task with no issues. Think-alouds and Inputlogs files were carefully reviewed by the researchers to identify any invalid performance.

Reading task

Students were given four digital texts on the debated topic (see paragraph on texts within the material section for details). They were given the following instructions: “You will now read four texts that argue positions on a controversial topic in education. You can read them as many times as you like and return to them as many times as you like. When you have finished reading the passages, move on to writing. You will be asked to write an essay that discusses the positions expressed in each text and includes a conclusion that integrates the strengths of the positions expressed.” This instruction was given so that participants knew that they had to read texts with the purpose of writing an argumentative synthesis essay.

While the participants were reading, they were asked to think-aloud, that is: “say out loud everything that is on your mind, whether inherent in the text you read or not. You should verbalize as much as you can, in any case at least every two minutes (a timer will help you keep time).” Before the reading task, participants practiced think-aloud with a practice text and received feedback from the researcher. The whole reading task was recorded through a screencast software to capture both the reading activity and the thoughts voiced aloud.

Writing task

The participants were given the following instructions: “After reading the texts, you will have to write an essay that, based on the texts you have read, discusses the positions expressed in each text and includes a conclusion that integrates the strengths of the positions expressed. This is a time and effort-consuming task, as it involves consulting the texts, extracting and connecting the key ideas from the four texts, and writing an essay that draws your own conclusion and explains in a well-argued manner why you came to that conclusion. You can go back and read the texts as many times as you like. There is no time limit for this exercise, but it is very important to perform the reading and writing task in one work session, without interruptions.” This instruction was given to help students understand what an argumentative synthesis task is. This type of task is uncommon in the Italian educational system, and students needed some explanation of what it was expected from them.

While performing the writing task, Inputlog was running in the background and logging the writing process. Students were instructed not to take notes on paper. In this way, Inputlog could register every instant the students switched between their own text document and the digital sources, in this way, students’ recursive behavior was logged.

Free recall

After one week, the participants were asked to recall as much content as they could from the texts that they had read (without accessing them). This measure provides an indication of long-term comprehension of the texts.

Strategic reading from think-aloud protocols

Strategic reading was assessed through a think-aloud protocol, which was transcribed and coded following a category system elaborated following a deductive-inductive process. First, we analyzed the scientific literature, identified the studies that investigated strategic reading through think-aloud and created a list of reading strategies (e.g., Bereiter & Bird, 1985 ; Bråten & Strømsø, 2003 ). Then we examined 10% of the protocols to identify reading strategies that were not included in the list. This was the final list of reading strategies: Summarizing, Linking to prior knowledge, Digressing from topic, Expressing agreement with text, Linking to prior experiences, Identifying new information, Making proposals, Expressing disagreement with text, Voicing opinion, Identifying new perspectives, Expressing doubts, Assessing source, Comparing texts.

The protocols were coded through Qcamap (Fenzl & Mayring, 2017 ) by two independent coders, with a good inter-rater agreement ( k = 0.85). Then, we proceeded to calculate a composite score by adding the frequencies of all the functional reading strategies implemented (prior knowledge + agreement with text + prior experiences + new information + proposals + disagreement with text + personal opinion + perspective on topic + doubts + source relevance texts comparison). Verbosity was also assessed (total number of words expressed).

Recursivity in writing from Inputlog

Recursivity was assessed through Inputlog while students were writing, capturing the degree of recursivity between the essay and the sources, among several other indices of the writing process. We counted the number of transitions between the essay and the source texts, which were available when students were writing (absolute recursivity). The total number of transitions was then divided by the total time on task, resulting in a recursivity indicator: the total number of transitions between the sources and the essay per minute. Since the time participants spent on the task differed, it is also recommended to work with relative measures, so that recursivity can be compared between participants (relative recursivity).

Quality of syntheses from text analyses

Students were asked to write an argumentative essay on the topic discussed in the texts. The quality of the essays was assessed considering three different dimensions:

1) The level of argument-counterargument integration. As mentioned in the introduction, in this study we have adopted an analytical approach consistent with the proposal of Nussbaum and Schraw ( 2007 ), based on the intertextual integration of arguments and counterarguments (elements defined from other theoretical perspectives as claim and counter claim or position and counter position). Regarding this criterion, we employed the following coding tool developed by Mateos et al. ( 2018 ); authors who also rely on the framework of integrating arguments and counterarguments. See Table 1 (see supplementary materials B for an extended version):

As seen in the coding system, refutation strategies are considered to be of lower level than weighing and synthesis strategies. This is due to the association of refutation with processes still linked to the bias of one-sided reasoning (Mateos et al., 2018 ; Nussbaum, 2008 ).

2) Intertextual theme : whether students are able to identify the storyline connecting the texts to each other and whether they explicitly state it in their essays. We assigned the following scores: 0 (students do not identify the common theme); 1 (students only mention the common sub-topic of two texts); 2 (students identify the two sub-topics discussed in the four texts and explicitly state it in the essay).

3) Supraintegration : if the students are able to propose solutions that respond to the controversies addressed in four texts, i.e., not only based on one of the sub-topics. We assigned the following scores: 0 (the student focuses on one of the two sub-topics - either external evaluation tests or teacher evaluation - without proposing solutions that address both aspects); 1 (the student is able to mention arguments linked to the two issues, but not to propose solutions for both aspects); 2 (minimal supraintegration: the student proposes at most two solutions to give a combined answer to the problems of the two sub-topics); 3 (maximum supraintegration: the student proposes more than two solutions to give a combined answer to the problems of the two sub-topics).

Two independent judges (authors 2 and 4 of the paper) coded 38% of the argumentative essays to calculate the inter-rater reliability. Reliability indexes were appropriate for the three dimensions (ICC Integration: 0.85; ICC Intertextual theme: 0.81; ICC Supraintegration: 0.67). The cases in which there was no agreement were resolved by consensus, and the remaining 62% of the essays were evaluated by one of these researchers using the established criteria. Essay length was also assessed.

Delay recalls

A week after reading the texts, students were asked to recall what they had read. The outcome variable was the number of valid inferential clauses, as a measure of depth of comprehension. Valid inferences are logical connection across content discussed in different parts of a text (local inferences) or in different texts (intertextual inferences). Moreover, we also considered valid inferences logical connection between new information from the texts and students’ prior knowledge (global inferences) (Diakidoy et al., 2015 ; Tarchi & Villalón, 2021 ). Two raters coded independently the protocols, with a good inter-rater agreement ( k = 0.90).

Data analysis

Research objectives were investigated through descriptive statistics and non-parametric statistical analyses, given the low sample-size and the non-normal distribution of data. To address the first objective (description of recursivity behavior), we analyzed the descriptive statistics and calculated through a series of non-parametric comparisons for paired samples (Wilcoxon test) to determine in which interval (relative) recursivity was higher. Rank biserial correlations were used as a measure of effect size.

To address the second objective (comparison between high- versus low-recursive writers in argumentative quality), we analyzed the interaction between recursivity and outcome variables through a series of non-parametric comparisons for independent samples (Mann-Whintey test), with rank biserial correlations as a measure of effect size. To this end, high- (n = 22) versus low-recursive writers (n = 21) were identified through a median split of the relative recursivity score. While this approach is less than ideal from a statistical perspective, it helps to provide some initial data on reading and writing processes. Preliminarly, we investigated if there were pre-existing difference between groups in prior knowledge, beliefs, or need for cognition.

To address the third objective (comparison between high- versus low-recursive writers in strategic reading), we conducted a series of Mann–Whitney U tests on each reading strategy, with rank biserial correlation as a measure of effect size. The same two groups of high- and low-recursive participants were used in this analysis.

Descriptive statistics for individual variables related to the participants (i.e., perceived prior knowledge, prior beliefs, need for cognition and time on task), process variables (recursivity, strategic reading) and outcome variables (from the essay and free recall tasks) are reported in Supplementary Materials C . Descriptive analyses revealed that the strategies most employed in prereading were all related to synthesis activities; specifically voicing opinion, expressing agreement, and expressing doubts.

Description of recursive behavior

Overall, students spent 82.5 min completing the task (with a median of 76.50). In terms of absolute recursivity values, students went back and forth between the text they were writing and the sources they were reading 55.05 times (with a median of 40). In terms of relative recursivity values, students switched on average 0.58 times per minute (with a median of 0.51). To address our description objective, relative recursivity was used as an independent variable. Students’ performance measured with Inputlog was split into three time intervals: beginning, middle and end This was done by dividing each writer’s total time on task into three equal parts. Because of the complexity of the research design, it was only possible to collect data on a small number of subjects. Due to the sample size of the study and the non-normal distribution of some of the variables, nonparametric tests were performed.

According to Wilcoxon’s test, recursivity in the middle (Median = 0.64) was higher than recursivity in the beginning (Median = 0.43) and in the end (Median = 0.37), see Table 2 .

The following two cases (see Fig. 1 ) serve as an example to illustrate the recursive behavioral pattern over the three phases (i.,e., time interval) of the writing process as measured with keystroke logging. As there is quite some variance in recursivity among the students, we present a case of a high-recursive writer (Fig. 1 , case on the left side) and a case of a low-recursive writer (Fig. 1 , case on the right side). Recursivity is visually represented at the bottom of these graphs by the orange line. When the orange line runs at the top, the focus is on the sources. Every red dot represents a source text. When the orange line runs at the bottom, the focus was on the student’s synthesis text. The blue and green lines show the text production (y-axis: number of characters) at a certain point in time (x-axis). The blue line shows the production during the process, while the green line represents the production in the document. We refer to Vandermeulen et al. ( 2020b ) for a more complete description of the process graph.

As can be observed in the process graphs, both the high- and the low-recursive writer start the process with a focus on the sources. The second phase of the writing process is marked by text production and a certain degree of recursivity. Also in the third and final phase, text production is dominant. These patterns are in line with findings from previous studies on writing processes of source-based tasks. Synthesis writing processes are generally marked by an initial reading phase (Chau et al., 2022 ; Vandermeulen et al., 2020d ) followed by text production in the middle part of the process. Additionally, recursivity is important for the integration of information or arguments (Vandermeulen et al., 2020c ).

In the beginning of the writing process, both the students read the sources without going to their own text document (the orange line runs at the top), so (almost) no text production is taking place. The second process phase is marked by text production. After reading the sources, the students start writing their own text. Both production lines are increasing. An analysis of the keystroke logging data of these two cases shows that the high-recursive writer produces 98 characters per minute in the middle part of the process, thus text is produced rather fluently. At the same time, this student displays a rather high recursivity in the middle phase; this is reflected in the switches between the synthesis text and the sources (2.13 switches per minute). The time spent in the sources is considerably lower than in the first process phase (25% in the second part versus 72% in the first part) as it concerns quick switches between the text document and the sources. Based on these observations, we can argue that it is plausible that the high-recursive writer regularly goes back to the sources to look for information to incorporate in their text. It can be assumed that it is a goal-oriented activity as the checking of the sources is combined with fluent text production.

Although the low-recursive writer switches considerably less frequently between the synthesis text and the sources than the high-recursive writer, recursivity is the highest in the middle part of the process (0.70 switches in phase 2). Although the writer starts producing text in the middle phase of the process, text production is not fluent as this writer types 44 characters per minute. This is not surprising given that it is rather hard to produce text fluently when one relies on their memory to retrieve information from the sources that were read in the first phase of the process.

Illustrative cases: Process graphs generated by Inputlog of the writing process of a high-recursive and a low-recursive writer

Differences between high-recursive and low-recursive writers

Differences in strategic reading (process variables).

For this analysis, we referred to absolute recursivity as relative recursivity was not associated with strategic reading. Overall, high-recursive students had more strategic reading than low-recursive students did (U = 137, p < .05). As a post-hoc analysis, we repeated the Mann-Whitney test on each category. It must be noticed however, that since we are implementing a multiple testing procedure, results should be interpreted with caution. High-recursive writers voiced more their opinions about text content, expressed more doubts and compared the texts more frequently (see Table 3 ).

Differences in argumentative synthesis writing and delayed recall

To address the second objective, we analyzed the interaction between recursivity and outcome variables through a series of non-parametric comparisons (with rank biserial correlations as a measure of effect size). We also identified high- (n = 22) versus low-recursive writers (n = 21) through a median split of the relative recursivity score. While this approach is less than ideal from a statistical perspective, it helps to provide some initial data on reading and writing processes. Students with different recursivity levels (high- versus low-recursive students) did not differ in any individual variables, namely perceived prior knowledge (U = 156, p > .05), prior beliefs (U = 158, p > .05) or need for cognition (U = 112, p > .05).

According to the results from the Mann–Whitney U test (employed because of the non-normal distribution of the data), intertextual activity and recall of valid inferences differed across recursivity levels. In both cases, high-recursive writers outperformed low-recursive writers. To better understand at what step in the intertextual integration process recursivity may have an impact, we repeated the Mann–Whitney U test on each level of intertextual integration (see Table 4 ). High-recursive writers outperformed low-recursive writers in intertextual theme identification and supraintegration, but not in intertextual integration.

Source-based writing and argumentative reasoning are two fundamental skills in today’s world. We are exposed to complex and controversial topics such as climate change, geopolitical conflicts, pandemics, which require the ability to develop an informed opinion which takes into consideration multiple perspectives and supporting arguments. For these reasons, students should be engaged in argumentative synthesis writing, a type of task in which learners are asked to synthesize multiple perspectives based on sources. Unfortunately, research has demonstrated that students’ competence in writing argumentative synthesis essays are suboptimal, even in higher education (Hyytinen et al., 2021 ; Marttunen & Kiili, 2022 ; Nelson & King, 2023 ; Tarchi & Villalón, 2021 ). To contribute to the scaffolding of students’ competences in argumentative synthesis writing tasks, we focused our attention on recursivity, that is, going back and forth between the text we are writing and the sources we are reading (Du & List, 2020 ; Mateos & Solé, 2009 ; Tarchi & Villalón, 2022 ), to provide evidence of the writing process by keystroke logging. Moreover, it is still unclear to what extent recursivity is a strategic process. The present study aimed at addressing these two issues and also to provide more information on the recursivity variable itself.

In the present study, participants displayed an overall minimal level of integration across texts in their essays. Most of the essays were rated as “Minimum integration via weighing or synthesizing with no or partial conclusion.” (Mode = 4). Regarding our first objective, describing the participants’ recursivity behavior, if we look at absolute scores, the level of recursivity among university students involved in an argumentative synthesis writing task seems reasonably high (half of the participants with at least 40 switches between written text and sources), although with a high dispersion of data points, illustrating a consistent variance of recursivity within our sample. Although the absolute number of switches seems high, when we take into account how long they worked on the task, we notice that participants did not switch that often. In respect to the relative scores, our results are coherent with past studies that have indicated that recursivity is most frequently carried out in the middle part of the writing process (Vandermeulen et al., 2020c ). Moreover, overall, the relative level (number of switches per minute) was relatively low, compared to performances reported in previous studies. For instance, inspection of data gathered as part of national baseline study in the Netherlands (Vandermeulen et al., 2020a ) shows that Dutch students in their last year of upper-secondary school, switched on average 3.02 times per minute between the sources and their text when writing an argumentative text based on conflicting sources. Conversely, in our study we found an average of 0.58 of switches per minute. There are several reasons that may explain this result. Firstly, in the previously referenced national baseline study (Vandermeulen et al., 2020b ), students wrote for a maximum of 45 min, whereas in our study the task was open and students took an average of 82.5 min. This could depend on a higher complexity of the task (depending on the topic or the texts) or a higher engagement. Secondly, university students may have a more strategic approach or a higher expertise when reading sources, thus requiring to switch from sources to text less frequently. On the contrary, our sample was quite homogeneous for other control variables. This might be also the reason because we found no effect of the control variables we explored.

The hypothesis we had for the second objective was substantially supported by our data analysis and coherent with previous studies (Du & List, 2020 ; Solé et al., 2013 ). High-recursive students had a better performance in identifying the complexity of the issue explored (intertextual theme identification and supraintegration). However, intertextual integration performances in argumentative essays did not different across recursivity levels. This last result contradicts our research hypothesis, and it may depend that on the fact that the intertextual integration we used (Mateos et al., 2018 ) was originally designed and employed for intervention studies in which students were being taught the three strategies described by Nussbaum and Schraw ( 2007 ) and were expected to use them. Participants in those studies also had less complex pro-con tasks, with only a single major issue and only one pro-text and one con-text.

Moreover, the recall of valid inferences was also associated with a higher recursivity, indicating that a more effortful and nonlinear processing of the sources during writing fosters reading comprehension. These results are, to the best of our knowledge, the first direct evidence supporting the relevance of recursivity for intertextual integration and depth of comprehension in source-based writing. However, recursivity is not frequently found in the common behavior of secondary or even undergraduate students (Fidalgo et al., 2014 ; Mateos et al., 2018 : Solé et al., 2013 ) For that reason, it is essential that they receive instruction that includes this element, although it seems it is not easily incorporated. Tarchi and Villalón ( 2022 ) tested whether it is possible to scaffold university students’ recursivity through critical questions. The intervention was effective in improving text quality and induced, at least in some participants, a higher recursivity level as compared to the control group.

In this line, the hypothesis we had for the third objective was also supported by our data analysis. Recursivity was associated with strategic processing during reading, as assessed through the think-aloud methodology. This is in line with previous research (Du & List, 2020 ; Solé et al., 2013 ), pointing out that recursivity is linked to self-regulated writers. Past research on thinking aloud when reading multiple texts has emphasized the importance of organization and comprehension confirmation strategies in high-grade students, whereas most of the sample engaged in more shallow processing of texts and implemented memorization and elaboration strategies (Bråten & Strømsø, 2003 ). In this study, expressing opinions and doubts, and comparing the texts were associated with recursivity, suggesting that students may have looked back at the sources while writing their own text to integrate content across texts or text information with prior beliefs.

Limitations and directions for future research

When interpreting the findings of the current study, some limitations should be taken into account. Firstly, the sample size was quite low, although larger than in previous studies with similar methodologies (Du & List, 2020 ; Solé et al., 2013 ). For that reason, it was not allowed to run more complex analysis. Nevertheless, the sample size was appropriate for the statistical analysis performed in this study. As we provided evidence supporting the relevance of recursivity, future research should further investigate it.

Secondly, recursivity was associated with strategic reading but not with strategies implemented while writing. This was done as think-aloud is a methodology validated for reading but not for writing. The use of retrospective think-aloud protocols may address this issue (although participants do not always recall correctly what they were thinking). Moreover, we used Inputlog only when writing and not when reading not to overload participants, but in future the reading and writing activities should be studied more in terms of a flow of interweaved processes and activate Inputlog and or think-aloud from when they start reading to when they finish writing.

Thirdly, working memory, along with several other individual differences, may have influenced learners’ performances (e.g., the free recall measure or the actual need for recursivity). Given that the present research design does not allow us to assess working memory, future studies should investigate the influence of working memory on recursivity.

Conclusions

Recursivity is a behavior that can be tracked with softwares such as Inputlog. Thus, it represents a good candidate for being a learning analytics associated with quality of writing. As the reliance on online platforms to support learning processes is increasing, there is a high demand for automated assessments of writing products and processes (Strobl et al., 2019 ). Recursivity may be tracked to provide feedback to students as they progress in their writing. For instance, students displaying a low level of recursivity may receive a warning to go back to sources while writing, to support either planning, composing, or revising.

Importantly, the qualitative analysis of two writers suggests that high- versus low-recursive writers seem to address the task with different approaches. Good writers refer more often to sources at the beginning of the process, whereas in both cases they go back to sources in the middle part of the process. Our study suggests that more research is needed to investigate what good writers do in the initial stages of writing.

In the current society, citizens need to deal with information from different sources on a controversial topic and they should be able to express their own view in writing. Given that recursivity is a central element when composing a source-based text, students need evidence-based instruction which marks the role of it (Castells et al., 2022 ; van Ockenburg et al., 2019 ). In order to develop such instruction, it is of utmost importance to gain a better understanding of recursion processes. Past studies have shown that instruction may improve recursivity (Tarchi & Villalón, 2022 ). However, insights obtained from this study could provide valuable input to develop interventions aimed at supporting students’ source-based writing and, more in particular, the recursive process. More research on how recursivity is developed and promoted should be carried out, but this study is a first step.

Afflerbach, P., & Cho, B. Y. (2009). Determining and describing reading strategies: Internet and traditional forms of reading. In S. H. Waters, & W. Shneider (Eds.), Metacognition, Strategy Use, and instruction (pp. 201–225). Guilford Press.

Bannert, M., & Mengelkamp, C. (2008). Assessment of metacognitive skills by means of instruction to think aloud and reflect when prompted. Does the Verbalisation Method Affect Learning? Metacognition and Learning , 3 , 39–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-007-9009-6

Article Google Scholar

Bereiter, C., & Bird, M. (1985). Use of thinking aloud in identification and teaching of reading comprehension strategies. Cognition and Instruction , 2 , 131–156. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci0202_2

Braine, G. (1995). Writing in the natural sciences and engineering. In D. Belcher, & G. S. Braine (Eds.), Academic writing in a second language: Essays on research and pedagogy (pp. 113–134). Albex.

Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2003). A longitudinal think-aloud study of spontaneous strategic processing during the reading of multiple expository texts. Reading and Writing , 16 , 195–218. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022895207490

Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 42 , 116–131.

Casado-Ledesma, L., Cuevas, I., Van den Bergh, H., Rijlaarsdam, G., Mateos, M., Granado-Peinado, M., & Martín, E. (2021). Teaching argumentative synthesis writing through deliberative dialogues: Instructional practices in secondary education. Instructional Science , 49 , 515–559. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-021-09548-3

Castells, N., Minguela, M., & Nadal, E. (2022). Writing a synthesis versus reading: Strategies involved and impact on comprehension. Reading and Writing , 36 , 849–880. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-022-10341-y

Chau, L., Leijten, M., Bernolet, S., & Vangehuchten, L. (2022). Envisioning multilingualism in source-based writing in L1, L2, and L3: The relation between source use and text quality. Frontiers in Psychology . https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.914125

Craik, F. I. M. (2002). Levels of processing: Past, present… and future? Memory (Hove, England) , 10 , 305–318. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658210244000135

Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior , 11 , 671–684. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(72)80001-X

Dai, D. Y., & Wang, X. (2007). The role of need for cognition and reader beliefs in text comprehension and interest development. Contemporary Educational Psychology , 32 , 332–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2006.05.002

De La Paz, S., & Felton, M. K. (2010). Reading and writing from multiple source documents in history: Effects of strategy instruction with low to average high school writers. Contemporary Educational Psychology , 35 , 174–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.03.001

Diakidoy, I. A. N., Christodoulou, S. A., Floros, G., Iordanou, K., & Kargopoulos, P. V. (2015). Forming a belief: The contribution of comprehension to the evaluation and persuasive impact of argumentative text. British Journal of Educational Psychology , 85 , 300–315. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12074

Du, H., & List, A. (2020). Researching and writing based on multiple texts. Learning and Instruction , 66 , 101297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.101297

Emig, J. (1971). The composing processes of twelfth graders . National Council of Teachers of English.

Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1998). How to study thinking in everyday life: Contrasting think-aloud protocols with descriptions and explanations of thinking. Mind Culture and Activity , 5 , 178–186. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327884mca0503_3

Fenzl, T., & Mayring, P. (2017). QCAmap: Eine interaktive webapplikation für qualitative inhaltsanalyse. Zeitschrift für Soziologie der Erziehung und Sozialisation ZSE , 37 , 333–340.

Google Scholar

Fidalgo, R., Torrance, M., Arias-Gundín, O., & Martínez-Cocó, B. (2014). Comparison of reading-writing patterns and performance of students with and without reading difficulties. Psicothema , 26 , 442–448. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2014.23

Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication , 32 , 365–387.

Galbraith, D., & Baaijen, V. M. (2019). Aligning keystrokes with cognitive processes in writing. In E. Lingren & K. Sullivan (Eds.), Observing Writing. Insights from keystroke logging and handwriting (pp. 306–325). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004392526_015

Graham, S., Graham, S., Fulton, M., & Lou (2020). Reading and writing connections: A commentary. In R. A. Alves, T. Limpo, & R. M. Joshi (Eds.), Reading-writing connections. Literacy studies (19 vol., pp. 313–317). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-38811-9_19

Granado-Peinado, M., Cuevas, I., Olmos, R., Martín, E., Casado-Ledesma, L., & Mateos, M. (2023). Collaborative writing of argumentative syntheses by low-performing undergraduate writers: Explicit instruction and practice. Reading and Writing , 36 , 909–936. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-022-10318-x

Granado-Peinado, M., Mateos, M., Martín, E., & Cuevas, I. (2019). Teaching to write collaborative argumentative syntheses in higher education. Reading and Writing , 32 , 2037–2058. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-019-09939-6

Hayes, J. R. (2012). Modeling and remodeling writing. Written Communication , 29 , 369–388. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088312451260

Hirvela, A. (2004). Connecting Reading & writing in Second Language writing instruction . The University of Michigan Press.

Hu, J., & Gao, X. (2017). Using think-aloud protocol in self-regulated reading research. Educational Research Review , 22 , 181–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.09.004

Hyytinen, H., Siven, M., Salminen, O., & Katajavuori, N. (2021). Argumentation and Processing Knowledge in Open-Ended assignment tasks: Challenges and Accomplishments among Pharmacy Students. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice , 18 , 37–51.

Leijten, M., & Van Waes, L. (2013). Keystroke logging in writing Research: Using Inputlog to analyze writing processes. Written Communication , 30 , 358–392. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088313491692

List, A., & Alexander, P. A. (2020). Strategy use in learning from multiple texts: An investigation of the integrative framework of learning from multiple texts. Frontiers in Education , 5 , 578062. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.578062

Luna, M., Villalón, R., Martínez-Álvarez, I., & Mateos, M. (2023). Online interventions to help college students to improve the degree of integration of their argumentative synthesis. Reading and Writing , 36 , 937–963. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-021-10248-0

Marttunen, M., & Kiili, C. (2022). Supporting university students’ argumentative source-based writing. Written Language & Literacy , 25 , 228–252. https://doi.org/10.1075/wll.00068.mar

Mateos, M., Martín, E., Cuevas, I., Villalón, R., Martínez, I., & González-Lamas, J. (2018). Improving written argumentative synthesis by teaching the integration of conflicting information from multiple sources. Cognition and Instruction , 36 , 119–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2018.1425300

Mateos, M., & Solé, I. (2009). Synthesising information from various texts: A study of procedures and products at different educational levels. European Journal of Psychology of Education , 24 , 435–451. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03178760

Nelson, N. (2008). The reading–writing nexus in discourse research. In C. BaZerman (Ed.), Handbook of research on writing: History, society, school, individual, text (pp. 435–450). Lawrence Erlbaum.

Nelson, N., & King, J. R. (2023). Discourse synthesis: Textual transformations in writing from sources. Reading and Writing , 36 , 769–808. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-021-10243-5

Nussbaum, M. E. (2008). Using argumentation vee diagrams (AVDs) for promoting argument–counterargument integration in reflective writing. Journal of Educational Psychology , 100 , 549–565. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.3.549

Nussbaum, M. E., & Schraw, G. (2007). Promoting argument-counterargument integration in students’ writing. Journal of Experimental Education , 76 , 59–92. https://doi.org/10.3200/JEXE.76.1.59-92

Perl, S. (1980). Understanding composing. College Composition and Communication , 31 , 363–369. https://doi.org/10.2307/356586

Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively responsive reading . Erlbaum.

Reznitskaya, A., Kuo, L., Clark, A., Miller, B., Jadallah, M., Anderson, R. C., & Nguyen-Jahiel, K. (2009). Collaborative reasoning: A dialogic approach to group discussions. Cambridge Journal of Education , 39 , 29–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057640802701952

Schoor, C., Rouet, J. F., & Britt, M. A. (2023). Effects of context and discrepancy when reading multiple documents. Reading and Writing , 36 , 1111–1143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-022-10321-2

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. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:ESLL.0000033847.00732.af

Segev-Miller, R. (2007). Cognitive processes in discourse synthesis: The case of intertextual processing strategies. In M. Torrance, L. van Waes, & D. Galbraith (Eds.), Writing and cognition: Research and applications (pp. 231–250). https://doi.org/10.1108/S1572-6304(2007)0000020016

Solé, I., Miras, M., Castells, N., Espino, S., & Minguela, M. (2013). Integrating information: An analysis of the processes involved and the products generated in a written synthesis task. Written Communication , 30 , 63–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088312466532

Spivey, N. N. (1990). Transforming texts: Constructive processes in reading and writing. Written Communication , 7 , 256–287. https://doi.org/10.1177/074108839000700

Spivey, N. N. (1997). The constructivist metaphor: Reading, writing, and the making of meaning . Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/358470

Spivey, N. N., & King, J. R. (1989). Readers as writers composing from sources. Reading Research Quarterly , 24 , 7–26.

Strobl, C., Ailhaud, A., Benetos, K., Devitt, A., Kruse, O., & Rapp, C. (2019). Digital support for academic writing: A review of technologies and pedagogies. Computers & Education , 131 , 33–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.12.005

Tarchi, C. (2021). Effects of think-aloud on students’ multiple-documents comprehension. Applied Cognitive Psychology , 35 , 526–537. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3782

Tarchi, C., & Villalón, R. (2021). The influence of thinking dispositions on integration and recall of multiple texts. British Journal of Educational Psychology , 91 , 1498–1516. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12432

Tarchi, C., & Villalón, R. (2022). Fostering university students’ written argumentation via recursive reading: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of College Reading and Learning , 52 , 42–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/10790195.2022.2021771

Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The uses of argument . Cambridge University Press.

Vandermeulen, N., De Maeyer, S., Van Steendam, E., Lesterhuis, M., van den Bergh, H., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (2020a). Mapping synthesis writing in various levels of dutch upper-secondary education. A national baseline study on text quality, writing process and students’ perspectives on writing. Paedagogische Studiën , 97 , 187–236.

Vandermeulen, N., Leijten, M., & Van Waes, L. (2020b). Reporting writing process feedback in the classroom: Using keystroke logging data to reflect on writing processes. Journal of Writing Research , 12 , 109–140. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2020.12.01.05

Vandermeulen, N., van den Broek, B., Van Steendam, E., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (2020c). In search of an effective source use pattern for writing argumentative and informative synthesis texts. Reading and Writing , 33 , 239–266. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-019-09958-3

Vandermeulen, N., Van Steendam, E., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (2020d). Dataset - Baseline data LIFT Synthesis Writing project [Data set]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3893538

Vandermeulen, N., Van Steendam, E., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (2023). Introduction to the special issue on synthesis tasks: Where reading and writing meet. Reading and Writing , 36 , 747–768. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-022-10394-z

van Ockenburg, L., van Weijen, D., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (2019). Learning to write synthesis texts: A review of intervention studies. Journal of Writing Research , 10 , 401–428. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2019.10.03.01

Wengelin, Å., Frid, J., Johansson, R., & Johansson, V. (2019). Combining keystroke logging with other methods: Towards an experimental environment for writing process research. In Observing Writing (pp. 30–49). Brill.

Weston-Sementelli, J. L., Allen, L. K., & McNamara, D. S. (2018). Comprehension and writing strategy training improves performance on content-specific source-based writing tasks. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education , 28 , 106–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-016-0127-7

Download references

Open access funding provided by Università degli Studi di Firenze within the CRUI-CARE Agreement. This study has been partially funded by the Spanish Ministry of Education under the project PID2019-105250RB-I00.

Open access funding provided by Università degli Studi di Firenze within the CRUI-CARE Agreement.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Dept. of Education, Languages, Interculture, Literatures, and Psychology, University of Florence, via San Salvi, 12, Florence, 50135, Italy

Christian Tarchi, Lidia Casado-Ledesma & Anna Paola Fallaci

Universidad de Cantabria, Santander, Spain

Ruth Villalón

Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden

Nina Vandermeulen

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christian Tarchi .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

Authors have no competing interest to declare.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic Supplementary Material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Tarchi, C., Villalón, R., Vandermeulen, N. et al. Recursivity in source-based writing: a process analysis. Read Writ (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-023-10482-8

Download citation

Accepted : 16 September 2023

Published : 26 October 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-023-10482-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Recursivity
Think aloud
Process analysis
Find a journal
Publish with us
Track your research

Sample details

Writing process

Words: 1562

Essay Writing is a Recursive Process Discuss

Recursive ‘is a process of doing things again and again till they make sense and ready to be presented to the audience and the lecturer’ as highlighted by Ebest, at al (2005). It is a repetitive way, which makes the generation and the bringing up of new ideas and points easier, until they make a good flow and sense to the audience and the lecture as presented on https://goo.gle/tYpMcp. This process has five stages which are needed to be taken into account before starting to write an assignment, essay or thesis. These stages are as follows prewriting, drafting, revising, editing and proof reading as shown by Langan (2005) (6th ed). This process goes an extra mile in writing, as the writer takes his or her time to think on what he or she is about to write and how to put it on paper.

When writing an essay, assignment or thesis we must firstly do the prewriting process. The prewriting process is the process when you only have the topic paper and the pen, which means, one will be starting on scratch. At this stage, that is when one need to think as wide as he can. Prewriting can also be called the planning process on what you want to write. As presented by Clawson. (2016) https://youtu.be/ASw-iAd1TZo he highlighted that it has four stages which are as follows brainstorming, free writing, questioning and clustering . He said ‘brainstorming is the way of coming up with an idea or something like a memorable event in your life experience.’ When we have a topic we take a second step which is free writing, he highlighted this as, ‘free writing as a way of writing anything that comes on to your mind.’ Then the third step he said ‘questioning is the way of asking questions to yourself like which, where, what, when, why and who.’ Then on clustering he said it is the last stage of free writing process as, ‘it is when we take all those things we had thought off onto a paper and start to organise them.’ This process of planning is a good way of coming up with ideas and knowledge on how to come up with something we do not have an idea on before, it helps people to have composure whenever they are given an assignment.

ready to help you now

Without paying upfront

Furthermore it is very easy to those who are not even interested in writing and composing, because it has simple procedures to follow. It gives a writer more time to think and organize on coming up with something which will be very interesting to the audience. However prewriting process is very monotonous because it needs more time to think for it, to be effective and to create a good meaning to the audience. It is not applicable when someone has things that are affecting him or her emotionally that will not give him time to think about anything, and the assignments will be needed to be handed in two days. If any procedure is missing in coming up with an essay it will be meaningless to those whom you are presenting to.

We then move on to the second stage of the writing process which is the drafting process. Drafting process ‘it is where by we take those ideas generated from the prewriting process on to the paper or a first draft as you can refer to the plan or the prewriting process’ as indicated by Sebraneck (1992). He also said ‘you can come up with ideas you never came across when you were jotting down the points in the first stage.’ It leads to the development of the existing ideas and generation of the newer ones. ‘When rereading the first draft you can come across and you may discover a word, phrase or an idea that can be stated well’ this was highlighted by Ebest, at al (2005). He took this idea further when he said ‘writing on a paper does not mean the first paper drafted is the one which focuses on perfection.’ Drafting can shut the creative side of your mind and lead to writer’s block. As presented on https://youtu.be/xqk6-ePxPa8 they also said ‘it is the product of free writing process.’ This process it involves the organisation of thoughts that have been presented on the prewriting stage till they make a meaning and sense. ‘It helps the writer to elaborate key ideas which are mainly focusing on the given topic or assignment’ as propound by Elbow (2019). However drafting process is stressing as it is also a process of repetition of what have been done in the planning process.

It requires a lot of papers to be drafted before taken to the final draft and time taken will be more as you will revisit to the same thing. It leads to boredom as much time will be spent doing the same thing.

The third stage is the revising stage theses are now the final stage of the recursive process. Revising stage it is when we polish the styles and fix grammar, spelling and punctuation errors. This stage requires one to have fresh eyes as it is one of the final stages of the writing process. ‘It involves rearrangement of paragraphs and sentences you may add or you can take out information for it to make sense’ as highlighted by Strunk (1995). You can discover some furs in the arrangement o statements of the sentences and also calling for transposition. This is the managing and correcting stage. This process also involves the generation of the new idea as removing irrelevant sentences and correcting misspelt words leads to addition of new flesh on to the points for them to make sense. The correction of your own mistakes it helps a writer to have more time researching more about the assignment. It gives room to consult friends to come and take a look and go through your essay and correct you and give ideas and correct you before going on to editing. ‘This stage makes the essay unique, more precise and effective’ as highlighted by Lyons (2000). However as this process needs to revisit what we have done it will lead to forgetting and ignoring other points that we thought they were strong enough without adding anything. The involvement of friends may lead to misunderstandings as they will try to take other points in different ways to create different meanings.

The fourth stage is the editing process which will lead us to the final product of writing process. Revising it also involve rearrangement of paragraphs. Strunk and White (1995) said ‘they can produce what they are after on the first try quite often you will discover, on examining the completed that they are furs in the arrangement.’ Which means this stage requires more focuses and interest to make the corrections. This process is an ongoing process, not a onetime even. It is encourages the author to edit his work as possible. This process focuses on the correction and the correct use of grammar punctuation. It is easy to correct the errors when you go through your own work reading out loud as it can be ease to allocate where you have made a mistake. The editing of your own work need to be done more than two or more times to impress the readers. Nordquist (2019) highlighted that ‘most effective editing involves tightening …. Short run or work and it becomes better’. This process avoids mistakes to be presented to the audience as it takes a broader look on the correction of mistakes. As moving step by step makes the writer to think on adding some flesh to the sentence and add meanings. It gives the writer confidence to make his work more cohesive and more interest as he will correct his own mistakes made during composing. It makes good flow of the essay or presentation. However this process is very time consuming as you redo editing more than two times.

The last stage is the proofreading process which is the end product of the prewriting process. Proof reading one feels comfortable with the style of your writing as you will be ready to publish. This involves going through every point and every statement in looking for errors and punctuation, spacing, capitalisation of words, sources used and italics used.

In an, nut shell essay writing is a recursive process as the advantages outweighs the disadvantages like it is time consuming. It creates boredom as there is repetition of the work done. There are lot of procedure that are needed to be taken into account. So the prewriting, process, drafting, revising, editing and proofreading are needed to be taken into account in coming up with a good essay and to make a good flow.

Reference List

Clawson. C (2016) ‘Brainstorming’ Available at https://youtu.be/ASw-iAd1TZo (accessed on 16 may 2016).
Ebest, S, B., Alred, G, J., Brusaw, C, T. and Olio, W, E (5th ed) (2005) Writing A-Z.
New York: McGraw Hills Companies Inco.
Langan, J. (6th ed) (2005) College Writing Skills. New York: McGraw Hill Inco
Lyons, E.(2002) Notification Book Proposal Anybody can Write. New York: Penguin Random House
Nordquist, R. (2019) Editing available at Wikipedia (accessed on 03 July 2019).
Sebraneck, P., Merger, V. and Camper, D. (1992) Writers Inc. Burlington: Educational Publishing House.
Mometrix Academy. (2019) ‘Recursive Writing Process’ available at https://goo.gle/tYpMcp (date accessed on16 may 2019).

Cite this page

https://graduateway.com/essay-writing-is-a-recursive-process-discuss/

You can get a custom paper by one of our expert writers

Educational inequality
Purpose of Education
Writing Experience
Special education
English Language
Intellectual property
Female education
Health education

Check more samples on your topics

A rhetorical analysis of analytical writing and descriptive writing styles and a comparison and contrast of the two writing styles.

Rhetorical Analysis/Inquiry & Descriptive Genres. There are many different writing genres, for example analytical and descriptive to name two. Analytical writing is commonly used to show logical relationships between two or more concepts. As for descriptive writing it describes clear details of people, places, objects, or events in order to reveal a vivid picture to

Hiring Process in Bank Alfalah Limited According to Decision Making Process

Decision Making

Acknowledgment I would like to express my gratitude to all those who gave us the possibility to complete this assignment. I want to thank the Department of Business Administration for giving me permission to commence this assignment in the first instance, to do the necessary research work. I am deeply indebted to our supervisor Madam Syeda Humaira

The Teaching Process and the Process of Teaching Sample

The process-essay written by Diane Cole “Don’t merely stand there” ( Cole 346-350 ) describes illustrations of how person when faced with an violative remark may talk to the individual who said the violative comment ( s ) . Overall this essay is really good written and the assorted illustrations of ways in which person

War can never be justified, discuss Argumentative Essay

War can never be justified. Discuss War. One of the most destructive and futile thing on our planet, yet the ambition of war is usually to find peace is it not? Battle tends to start over the love of power; William Gladstone once said "We look forward to the time when the Power of Love will

Essay – Company Law Discuss Task

The area of law relevant to this case study is directors' duties of care and due diligence, of avoiding conflict of interest, as well as of good faith and proper purposes. Step 2: Discuss relevant legal principles Harris, Harboring and Adams (2011, 485) states that directors owe a fiduciary duty to their company and as such,

Applying the Three-Step Writing Process to Wiki

Whether you are creating a new wiki, adding material to an existing one, or revising one, applying the three-step writing process is effective and adaptable. While wikis don’t require that you have much technical or writing expertise, it is still important for you to apply the three-step process to assure that your contributions are credible

Process Writing Packing for a Trip

Everyone dreads the whole packing process for a trip or a long vacation. Getting everything in order can be a major drag. People do not realize it, but there are certain processes to follow that can make this whole cycle a lot easier. “What to pack? ” “Where to put it? ” “Do we have

Writing and Process

human communication

Writing and Process Essay BY ni4238901 Process essays are essays that explain to the audience how to do something or how to complete a task. This may involve explaining how to put items or ingredients together to make a finished product, such as in a recipe. These essays can also explain how to accomplish a

My Process of Writing

Everyone has a different type of writing process that they go through every time that they write a paper from start to finish. I personally like to start writing a paper at least a week in advance before it is due that way I will receive a good grade for the assignment. I’ve always liked

Hi, my name is Amy 👋

In case you can't find a relevant example, our professional writers are ready to help you write a unique paper. Just talk to our smart assistant Amy and she'll connect you with the best match.

How to Write a Report: A Guide to Report Format and Best Practice

A report is a nonfiction account that presents and/or summarizes the facts about a particular event, topic, or issue. The idea is that people who are unfamiliar with the subject can find everything they need to know from a good report.

Reports make it easy to catch someone up to speed on a subject, but actually writing a report is anything but easy. So to help you understand what to do, below we present a little report of our own, all about report writing and report format best practices.

Communicate with confidence Grammarly helps you write the way you intend Write with Grammarly

What is a report?

Types of report formats

What is the structure of a report, what should be included in a report, how to write a report in 7 steps, what is a report .

In technical terms, the definition of a report is pretty vague: any account, spoken or written, of the matters concerning a particular topic. This could refer to anything from a courtroom testimony to a grade schooler’s book report .

Really, when people talk about “reports,” they’re usually referring to official documents outlining the facts of a topic, typically written by an expert on the subject or someone assigned to investigate it. There are different types of reports, explained in the next section, but they mostly fit this description.

What kind of information is shared in reports? Although all facts are welcome, reports, in particular, tend to feature these types of content:

Details of an event or situation
The consequences or ongoing effect of an event or situation
Evaluation of statistical data or analytics
Interpretations from the information in the report
Predictions or recommendations based on the information in the report
How the information relates to other events or reports

Reports are closely related to essay writing , although there are some clear distinctions. While both rely on facts, essays add the personal opinions and arguments of the authors. Reports typically stick only to the facts, although they may include some of the author’s interpretation of these facts, most likely in the conclusion.

Moreover, reports are heavily organized, commonly with tables of contents and copious headings and subheadings. This makes it easier for readers to scan reports for the information they’re looking for. Essays, on the other hand, are meant to be read start to finish, not browsed for specific insights.

There are a few different types of reports, depending on the purpose and to whom you present your report. Here’s a quick list of the common types of reports:

Academic report: Tests a student’s comprehension of the subject matter, such as book reports, reports on historical events, and biographies
Business reports: Identifies information useful in business strategy, such as marketing reports, internal memos, SWOT analysis, and feasibility reports
Scientific reports: Shares research findings, such as research papers and case studies, typically in science journals

Reports can be further divided into categories based on how they are written. For example, a report could be formal or informal, short or long, and internal or external. In business, a vertical report shares information with people on different levels of the hierarchy (i.e., people who work above you and below you), while a lateral report is for people on the author’s same level, but in different departments.

There are as many types of reports as there are writing styles, but in this guide, we focus on academic reports, which tend to be formal and informational.

>>Read More: What Is Academic Writing?

The report format depends on the type of report and the requirements of the assignment. While reports can use their own unique structure, most follow this basic template:

Executive summary: Just like an abstract in an academic paper, an executive summary is a standalone section that summarizes the findings in your report so readers know what to expect. These are mostly for official reports and less so for school reports.
Introduction: Setting up the body of the report, your introduction explains the overall topic that you’re about to discuss, with your thesis statement and any need-to-know background information before you get into your own findings.
Body: The body of the report explains all your major discoveries, broken up into headings and subheadings. The body makes up the majority of the entire report; whereas the introduction and conclusion are just a few paragraphs each, the body can go on for pages.
Conclusion: The conclusion is where you bring together all the information in your report and come to a definitive interpretation or judgment. This is usually where the author inputs their own personal opinions or inferences.

If you’re familiar with how to write a research paper , you’ll notice that report writing follows the same introduction-body-conclusion structure, sometimes adding an executive summary. Reports usually have their own additional requirements as well, such as title pages and tables of content, which we explain in the next section.

There are no firm requirements for what’s included in a report. Every school, company, laboratory, task manager, and teacher can make their own format, depending on their unique needs. In general, though, be on the lookout for these particular requirements—they tend to crop up a lot:

Title page: Official reports often use a title page to keep things organized; if a person has to read multiple reports, title pages make them easier to keep track of.
Table of contents: Just like in books, the table of contents helps readers go directly to the section they’re interested in, allowing for faster browsing.
Page numbering: A common courtesy if you’re writing a longer report, page numbering makes sure the pages are in order in the case of mix-ups or misprints.
Headings and subheadings: Reports are typically broken up into sections, divided by headings and subheadings, to facilitate browsing and scanning.
Citations: If you’re citing information from another source, the citations guidelines tell you the recommended format.
Works cited page: A bibliography at the end of the report lists credits and the legal information for the other sources you got information from.

As always, refer to the assignment for the specific guidelines on each of these. The people who read the report should tell you which style guides or formatting they require.

Now let’s get into the specifics of how to write a report. Follow the seven steps on report writing below to take you from an idea to a completed paper.

1 Choose a topic based on the assignment

Before you start writing, you need to pick the topic of your report. Often, the topic is assigned for you, as with most business reports, or predetermined by the nature of your work, as with scientific reports. If that’s the case, you can ignore this step and move on.

If you’re in charge of choosing your own topic, as with a lot of academic reports, then this is one of the most important steps in the whole writing process. Try to pick a topic that fits these two criteria:

There’s adequate information: Choose a topic that’s not too general but not too specific, with enough information to fill your report without padding, but not too much that you can’t cover everything.
It’s something you’re interested in: Although this isn’t a strict requirement, it does help the quality of a report if you’re engaged by the subject matter.

Of course, don’t forget the instructions of the assignment, including length, so keep those in the back of your head when deciding.

2 Conduct research

With business and scientific reports, the research is usually your own or provided by the company—although there’s still plenty of digging for external sources in both.

For academic papers, you’re largely on your own for research, unless you’re required to use class materials. That’s one of the reasons why choosing the right topic is so crucial; you won’t go far if the topic you picked doesn’t have enough available research.

The key is to search only for reputable sources: official documents, other reports, research papers, case studies, books from respected authors, etc. Feel free to use research cited in other similar reports. You can often find a lot of information online through search engines, but a quick trip to the library can also help in a pinch.

3 Write a thesis statement

Before you go any further, write a thesis statement to help you conceptualize the main theme of your report. Just like the topic sentence of a paragraph, the thesis statement summarizes the main point of your writing, in this case, the report.

Once you’ve collected enough research, you should notice some trends and patterns in the information. If these patterns all infer or lead up to a bigger, overarching point, that’s your thesis statement.

For example, if you were writing a report on the wages of fast-food employees, your thesis might be something like, “Although wages used to be commensurate with living expenses, after years of stagnation they are no longer adequate.” From there, the rest of your report will elaborate on that thesis, with ample evidence and supporting arguments.

It’s good to include your thesis statement in both the executive summary and introduction of your report, but you still want to figure it out early so you know which direction to go when you work on your outline next.

4 Prepare an outline

Writing an outline is recommended for all kinds of writing, but it’s especially useful for reports given their emphasis on organization. Because reports are often separated by headings and subheadings, a solid outline makes sure you stay on track while writing without missing anything.

Really, you should start thinking about your outline during the research phase, when you start to notice patterns and trends. If you’re stuck, try making a list of all the key points, details, and evidence you want to mention. See if you can fit them into general and specific categories, which you can turn into headings and subheadings respectively.

5 Write a rough draft

Actually writing the rough draft , or first draft, is usually the most time-consuming step. Here’s where you take all the information from your research and put it into words. To avoid getting overwhelmed, simply follow your outline step by step to make sure you don’t accidentally leave out anything.

Don’t be afraid to make mistakes; that’s the number one rule for writing a rough draft. Expecting your first draft to be perfect adds a lot of pressure. Instead, write in a natural and relaxed way, and worry about the specific details like word choice and correcting mistakes later. That’s what the last two steps are for, anyway.

6 Revise and edit your report

Once your rough draft is finished, it’s time to go back and start fixing the mistakes you ignored the first time around. (Before you dive right back in, though, it helps to sleep on it to start editing fresh, or at least take a small break to unwind from writing the rough draft.)

We recommend first rereading your report for any major issues, such as cutting or moving around entire sentences and paragraphs. Sometimes you’ll find your data doesn’t line up, or that you misinterpreted a key piece of evidence. This is the right time to fix the “big picture” mistakes and rewrite any longer sections as needed.

If you’re unfamiliar with what to look for when editing, you can read our previous guide with some more advanced self-editing tips .

7 Proofread and check for mistakes

Last, it pays to go over your report one final time, just to optimize your wording and check for grammatical or spelling mistakes. In the previous step you checked for “big picture” mistakes, but here you’re looking for specific, even nitpicky problems.

A writing assistant like Grammarly flags those issues for you. Grammarly’s free version points out any spelling and grammatical mistakes while you write, with suggestions to improve your writing that you can apply with just one click. The Premium version offers even more advanced features, such as tone adjustments and word choice recommendations for taking your writing to the next level.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

35 Writing Is Recursive

by Chris Blankenship

What does Pinker mean when he says “recursively,” though?

So, what does recursion have to do with writing?

There are many ways to think about the writing process, but here’s one that my students have said makes sense to them. It involves five separate ways of thinking about a writing task:

Invention: Coming up with ideas.

Research: Finding new information.

Drafting: Creating the text.

Revision: Literally, seeing the text again.

Editing: Looking at the surface level of the text.

On the other hand, Sommers also researched how experienced writers approach a writing task. She found that their writing process is different from that of student writers:

For example, a colleague and I wrote a chapter for a book on working conditions at colleges, a topic we’re interested in.

When we started, we had to come up with an idea for the text by talking through our experiences and deciding on a purpose for the text. [Invention]
Although we both knew something about the topic already, we read articles and talked to experts to learn more about it. [Research]
From that research, we decided that our original idea didn’t quite fit with the research that was out there already, so we made some changes to the big idea. [Invention]
After that, we sat down and, over several sessions on different days, created a draft of our text. [Drafting]
When we read through the text, we discovered that the order of the information didn’t make as much sense as we had first thought, so we moved around some paragraphs, making changes to those paragraphs to help the flow of the new order. [Revision]
After that, we sent the rough draft to the editors of the book for feedback. When we got the chapter back, the editors commented that our topic didn’t quite fit the theme of the book, so, using that feedback, we changed the focus of the ideas. [Invention]
Then we changed the text to reflect those new ideas. [Revision]
We also got feedback from peer reviewers who pointed out that one part of the text was a little confusing, so we had to learn more about the ideas in that section. [Research]
We changed the text to reflect that new understanding. [Revision and Editing]
After the editors were satisfied with those revisions, we proofread the article and sent it off for final approval. [Editing]

“Revision Strategies of Student Writers and Experienced Adult Writers” in College Composition and Communication 31.4, 378-88 ↵

Share This Book

IMAGES

Essay Writing is a Recursive Process Discuss Free Essay Example 1562 words
Online Essay Help
The Essay Writing Process: A Step-by-Step Guide
Essay writing is a recursive process. Discuss?
Exposition and the Recursive Writing Process
Download Átvételi Elismervény PDF

VIDEO

What is the recursive approach to writing? 📝
CS50 RECURSIVE ATOI
Writing recursive rules for arithmetic and geometric sequences
What is recursion?
Writing recursive formulas for sequences quickly and simply!
Arithmetic Sequences: Writing Recursive & Explicit Formulas

COMMENTS

Essay writing is a recursive process. Discuss?
Writing is a process that involves at least four distinct steps: prewriting, drafting, revising, and editing. It is known as a recursive process.While you are revising, you might have to return to ...
Writing as a Process: Writing is Recursive
Writing is recursive. "Recursive" simply means that each step you take in your writing process will feed into other steps: after you've drafted an essay, for instance, you'll go do a bit of verification of some of your facts—and if you discover that you've gotten something wrong, you'll go back to the draft and fix it.
PDF Understanding Writing as a Recursive Process
A recursive process refers to the way writers often loop back or revisit earlier work as we write. Say a writer has planned pretty carefully how a draft will be. 50. organized. Even with careful planning, once in the middle of that draft, she might realize that part of that plan isn't working out as she imagined.
Recursive Writing Process
Learn how to use the recursive writing process for longer essay assignments that require research and analysis. Follow the steps of pre-writing, drafting, revising, editing, and proofreading to produce clear and effective academic writing.
Recursive Writing Process
Learn how to write recursively, which means repeating, revising, and reflecting on your writing process. See examples of recursive writing and how it can improve your skills and evaluation.
Writing Is Recursive
Learn how recursion, a term from computer science, can help you improve your writing process. See how experienced writers use invention, research, drafting, revision, and editing in a recursive way.
Resources for Writers: The Writing Process
Writing is a process that involves at least four distinct steps: prewriting, drafting, revising, and editing. It is known as a recursive process. While you are revising, you might have to return to the prewriting step to develop and expand your ideas. Prewriting. Prewriting is anything you do before you write a draft of your document.
What is the Recursive Writing Process? (Video)
Learn how to use the recursive writing process to write an essay, a story, or a novel. The process involves four steps: prewriting, drafting, revising, and editing. See examples and tips for each step.
Writing Is Recursive
Learn how writing is a recursive process that involves invention, research, drafting, revision, and editing. See how experienced writers loop through these stages repeatedly until they achieve their goals.
Writing Is Recursive
Learn how writing is a recursive process that involves invention, research, drafting, revision, and editing. See how experienced writers loop through these stages repeatedly until they achieve their goals.
Defining the Writing Process
People often think of writing in terms of its end product—the email, the report, the memo, essay, or research paper, all of which result from the time and effort spent in the act of writing. In this course, however, you will be introduced to writing as the recursive process of planning, drafting, and revising. Writing is Recursive
Writing Craft: Writing as a recursive process
The Process of Repetition. Writing as a recursive process encompasses the writing process itself (prewriting, drafting, revising, and editing). It allows you to revisit previous steps and jump around during a writing project because, as most approaches to academic writing will tell you, these processes flow into one another, creating fluidity ...
2.3: Writing is a Non-Linear and Recursive Process
Writing is a non-linear and recursive process. This means that most writers do not "begin at the beginning" of a piece and "end at the end.". Instead, composing takes places in chunks, with authors going back and forth between clusters of ideas and writing possibilities, constantly reviewing and revising them, and moving them between ...
Writing is Recursive, NOT Linear: Free Task Cards Included!
She has taught high school English for 10+ years in Dallas, Chicago, and New York City and holds a M.A. in Literature from Northwestern University. She has always had a connection to the written word-- through songwriting, screenplay writing, and essay writing-- and she enjoys the process of teaching students how to express their ideas.
2.5: The Main Stages of the Writing Process
It is also important to understand that the writing process is recursive and non-linear. What this means is that a writer may finish initial invention, produce a draft, and then go back to generating more ideas, before revising the text he or she created. Figure 2.1 - The Writing Process. Source: www.mywritingportfolio.net
Writing
The writing process is also recursive. This means that the steps of the process don't unfold in a clean, precise order. Instead, writers move between steps, leaping forward, circling back and repeating them as needed. In fact, you might find it more helpful to think of the writing process as a buffet of writing activities rather than a rigid ...
Writing is Recursive
In modern English, recursion is used to describe a process that loops or "runs again" until a task is complete. It's a term often used in computer science to indicate a program or piece of code that continues to run until certain conditions are met, such as a variable determined by the user of the program. The program would continue ...
Writing Is Recursive
It's why a carefully thought-out essay tends to be better than one that's written the night before the due date. ... She found that their writing process is different from that of student writers: Unlike student writers, professional writers, like Steven Pinker, don't view each part of the writing process as a step to be visited just once ...
Recursively Using Stages of the Writing Process
Writing is often scary, but it is also a skill like any other, one mastered with the proper tools. Among the most powerful of these is the process approach, a recursive technique using discrete ...
Recursivity in source-based writing: a process analysis
In university settings, writing argumentative essays from reading conflicting source texts is a common task for students. In performing this synthesis task, they must deal with conflicting claims about a controversial issue as they develop their own positions. Argumentative synthesis is characterized by writers' back-and-forth moves between reading source texts and writing their own texts ...
Writing is Recursive, Not Linear: Free Task Cards to Reflect Writing as
Use the recursive writing process graphic with your students to replace the old linear one and to show your students that writing is a recursive process. ... She has always had a connection to the written word-- through songwriting, screenplay writing, and essay writing-- and she enjoys the process of teaching students how to express their ...
Essay Writing is a Recursive Process Discuss
Learn how essay writing is a recursive process with five stages: prewriting, drafting, revising, editing and proof reading. See the advantages and disadvantages of each stage and how to apply them effectively.
How to Write a Report: A Guide to Report Formats with Examples
Reports are closely related to essay writing, although there are some clear distinctions. While both rely on facts, essays add the personal opinions and arguments of the authors. Reports typically stick only to the facts, although they may include some of the author's interpretation of these facts, most likely in the conclusion.
Writing Is Recursive
In modern English, recursion is used to describe a process that loops or "runs again" until a task is complete. It's a term often used in computer science to indicate a program or piece of code that continues to run until certain conditions are met, such as a variable determined by the user of the program. The program would continue ...
PDF Supreme Court of The United States
ing results, extracurricular involvement, essay quality, per-sonal factors, and student background. Id., at 600. Readers are responsible for providing numerical ratings for the aca-demic, extracurricular, personal, and essay categories. Ibid. During the years at issue in this litigation, un-derrepresented minority students were "more likely to

Essay writing is a recursive process. Discuss?

All Answers (3)

Related Publications

Guide to Writing at Stetson University

Writing as a Process: Writing is Recursive

Thesis statements and topic sentences perform nearly the same function in your writing: each one makes a claim, or states a main idea, and each one serves as a central focus connecting ideas presented earlier and leads to ideas about to come.

Have a question? Ask a librarian! Email [email protected]. Call or text 386-747-9028.

Resources for Writers: The Writing Process

The Recursive Writing Process

Writing Is Recursive

Invention: Coming up with ideas.

Research: Finding new information.

Drafting: Creating the text.

Revision: Literally, seeing the text again.

Editing: Looking at the surface level of the text.

Share This Book

Writing Is Recursive

Invention: Coming up with ideas.

Research: Finding new information.

Drafting: Creating the text.

Revision: Literally, seeing the text again.

Editing: Looking at the surface level of the text.

Share This Book

An Overview of the Writing Process

Writing is Recursive

Developing Your Writing Process

A Writer’s Process: Ali Hale

A Writer’s Process: Anne Lamott

The Writing Post

Share this:

Leave a comment Cancel reply

Discover more from The Writing Post

Margin Size

2.5: The Main Stages of the Writing Process

Invention Techniques

Free-writing

Brainstorming

Mind-Mapping

Keeping a journal or a writer’s notebook

Examining your Current Knowledge

Designing Research Questions

Writing Process: Writing

Process is individual and recursive

Understanding

Research question(s)

Researching

Planning, Refining, Reflecting

Editing or revising

Proofreading

41 Writing Is Recursive

Invention: Coming up with ideas.

Research: Finding new information.

Drafting: Creating the text.

Revision: Literally, seeing the text again.

Editing: Looking at the surface level of the text.

Share This Book

Recursivity in source-based writing: a process analysis

Cite this article

Similar content being viewed by others

Learning paths in synthesis writing: Which learning path contributes most to which learning outcome?

Collaborative writing of argumentative syntheses by low-performing undergraduate writers: explicit instruction and practice

Source-based writing

Recursivity in source-based writing

Process analysis in reading and writing

The present study

Participants

Source texts

Reading task

Writing task

Free recall

Strategic reading from think-aloud protocols

Recursivity in writing from Inputlog

Quality of syntheses from text analyses

Delay recalls

Data analysis

Description of recursive behavior

Differences between high-recursive and low-recursive writers

Differences in argumentative synthesis writing and delayed recall

Limitations and directions for future research

Conclusions