Relation Between Oral Language and Written Composition: Results from a Meta-Analysis

• In Event: Advancing Understanding of Oral Language, Motivation, Writing, and Shared Skills Between Reading and Writing

Abstract

Objectives: Writing requires translating generating ideas into oral language, and theoretical models note the importance of oral language in writing. Prior meta-analyses highlight the crucial role oral language plays in written composition, demonstrating a moderate yet significant relation between these abilities (Graham & Eslami, 2020; Kent & Wanzek, 2016). Despite this established connection, there is considerable variability observed across empirical studies, indicating the need for a more nuanced understanding of how oral language intertwines with written composition. In the present study, we examined the relation of oral language and written composition and potential factors responsible for the variations observed across different studies (i.e., moderators).
Theory: Theoretical models of writing, such as the not-so-simple view of writing (Berninger & Winn, 2006) and the Direct and Indirect Effects model of Writing (DIEW; Kim & Graham, 2022; Kim & Schatschneider, 2017), have posited the relation between oral language and written composition. Specifically, the dynamic relations hypothesis of DIEW posits that relations between skills and written composition vary as a function of development, orthographic depth, and the measurement of skills such as written composition. This meta-analysis examined the relation between oral language and written composition and explored various moderating factors, such as grade level, language learner status, developmental language disorder status, orthographic depth, and measurement features for both oral language and writing. For oral language, measurement features included outcome (quality vs. productivity), modality (expressive, productive, or mixed), and the distinction between normed and research-developed tasks. For written composition, factors considered included genre (informational vs. narrative), dimensions (e.g., quality, productivity), and the distinction of normed versus researcher-developed tasks.
Methods: A systematic search through multiple databases resulted in 104 studies involving 214,734 participants meeting the inclusion criteria.
Results: The results revealed a moderate but significant average correlation coefficient between oral language and written composition (r = .34). Moderation analyses indicated that this relation was stronger at higher grade levels and among foreign language learners, who exhibited a significantly stronger correlation than L1 speakers. The relation did not vary based on developmental language disorder or orthographic depth, likely due to a limited number of studies accounting for these specific variations. Additionally, the relation did not differ based on measurement features of oral language. However, it did vary across different dimensions of written composition, with a stronger relation observed for the writing quality dimension compared to writing productivity (e.g., the number of words).
Significance: These findings underscore the critical role of oral language in written composition while highlighting that this relation is not fixed. Instead, the connection is nuanced and varies depending on several factors, including developmental phase, language learning experience, and the dimensions of written composition. This demonstrates that the impact of oral language on writing is multifaceted, emphasizing the need for tailored educational approaches that consider these influencing factors to effectively enhance both reading and writing skills.

Authors

• Young-Suk Grace Kim, University of California - Irvine

• Rocío C. Seoane, Amplify Education, Inc.

• Jiali Wang, University of California - Irvine

• Yucheng Cao, Middle Tennessee State University