|
Volume 4, Number 1 (1995)
Assertions and
Alternatives: Helping ESL Undergraduates Extend Their Choices in Academic
Writing
DESMOND ALLISON
The University of Hong Kong
English as a second
language (ESL) undergraduates in various educational contexts are likely
to make assertions in their writing that experienced academic readers
judge to be unwarranted or unnecessary, or to qualify their assertions in
ways that appear inappropriate to subject lecturers and ESL teachers.
After reviewing reasons why this should be so, this article presents and
discusses short extracts from essays written by first-year undergraduates
following an ESL-medium humanities curriculum at the University of Hong
Kong. Some of the choices of wording carried what were apparently
unintended consequences for knowledge claims and relations with readers.
Class and tutorial feedback sessions on students' essays looked into ways
in which a writer's factual or evaluative claims might be advanced,
qualified, or assumed in linguistic choices from word to sentence level
and beyond. The suggestion is made that, in a "general" academic-purpose
context, focused explorations of warding can begin to relate writers'
textual choices to questions that matter in academic communication.
Designing and Assessing
Effective Classroom Writing Assignments for NES and ESL Students
JOY REID
University of Wyoming
BARBARA KROLL
California State University, Northridge
Academic writing is a form
of testing; moreover, for most writing tasks across the U.S.
college/university curriculum, the designer of the writing assignment is
also the audience and the evaluator, and that designer-evaluator expects
student-writers to demonstrate specific knowledge and skills. Therefore,
like all test designers, designers of writing assignments should carefully
consider the purpose(s), the parameters and constraints, and the
evaluation criteria for each writing assignment. In this article, we
discuss a range of issues in the design and assessment of classroom
writing tasks assigned in courses across the U.S. college/university
curriculum. We use a framework we designed previously to discuss the
preparation and evaluate the design of writing tasks. We then analyze
successful and unsuccessful writing across the curriculum assignments,
particularly from the perspective of English as a second language writers,
and offer suggestions that will enable teachers to design and assess
effective writing tasks.
Writing Across the
Curriculum, Writing Proficiency Exams, and the NNS College Student
MICHAEL JANOPOULOS
University of Northern Iowa
The growing trend in
American universities toward establishing stricter standards of writing
proficiency is an issue that directly affects students who are nonnative
speakers (NNSs) of English. Traditionally, institutions have attempted to
address NNS writing needs through a variety of means, including special
composition courses and Writing Center-based tutorial assistance. However,
the adequacy of such methods is now being tested as NNS students attempt
to satisfy new and presumably more stringent institutional writing
requirements. In brief, where it may once have been possible for NNS
students to graduate without being expected to write as often--or as
well--as students who are native English speakers (NESs), today's Writing
Across the Curriculum (WAC) programs mandate (theoretically, at least)
that they be held to the same standards of writing proficiency as native
speakers. This article explores issues concerning instruction and
evaluation of NNS students in institutions employing WAC programs. It
examines faculty expectations of NNS writing quality, NNS performance on
Writing Proficiency Exams, and support options available to NNS students,
and concludes that NNS students are being held to o double standard that
places them at risk. Finally, it discusses alternatives for recognizing
and dealing with discrepancies in WAC policies and practices on both the
individual and institutional levels.
Objective Measurement of
Low-Proficiency EFL Narrative Writing
SANDRA ISHIKAWA
Osaka University
Two groups of
low-proficiency English as a foreign language students were given
different practice tasks (writing out or answering questions about the
same picture stories) in order to determine which task type was more
related to increase in writing proficiency. One task forced a holistic
approach, while the other allowed students to focus on shorter,
unconnected segments. Since no suitable objective measures for
low-proficiency levels have been established, 24 measures and a high
criterion level for significance (p < .001) were used. The class which
practiced writing out picture stories (the holistic approach) showed more
improvement. To determine which of these objective measures would best
discriminate between extremely low and extremely close levels of second
language writing, the data obtained in this study were reanalyzed. Scores
for each student on each measure were converted to z scores and summed.
The sums were correlated with scores on each of the 24 measures to
determine which measures showed the highest and most reliable correlations
with the z-score sums. The best measure was found to be total words in
error-free clauses. The next-best measure was the number of error-free
clauses per composition. These measures discriminate well among samples of
low-proficiency writing.
Volume 4, Number 2
(1995)
Teachers' Conceptions of
Second Language Writing Instruction: Five Case Studies
LING SHI
ALISTER CUMMING
Ontario Institute for Studies in Education
We interviewed five
experienced instructors weekly about their ESL writing classes in selected
courses over 2 years at a Canadian university, aiming to document the
qualities of their thinking about their pedagogical practices as well as
the ways in which three of the teachers' thinking accommodated a specific
instructional innovation. Analyses of 48 tape-recorded interviews showed
each instructor's conceptions to be highly consistent in their individual,
expressed views about their teaching practices but also individually
grounded in a specific set of personal beliefs about teaching ESL writing.
The instructors using the pedagogical innovation focused much of their
attention initially on composing processes (seemingly in response to the
innovation). This focus then declined markedly over time as they
incorporated the innovation into their existing beliefs about teaching ESL
writing. These findings suggest that curricular changes in second language
writing necessarily need to be situated in reference to the individual
qualities of teachers' pedagogical conceptions as well as long-term views
on the accommodation of pedagogical change.
L2 Writers and the
Writing Center: A National Survey of Writing Center Conferencing at Graduate
Institutions
JUDITH K. POWERS
JANE V. NELSON
University of Wyoming
Writing centers have
become increasingly important resources for L2 academic writers across the
United States. This article reports and analyzes the results of a survey
of writing centers at 75 graduate institutions nationwide regarding their
work with L1 and L2 graduate writers. It discusses the kinds of L2 writers
writing centers serve, the training of writing center staff for L2
conferencing, the types of assistance L2 writers most frequently request,
the differences writing centers perceive in working with L1 and L2
graduate writers, and the difficulties they encounter in meeting the needs
of L2 clientele. Survey results suggest that collaborative efforts between
ESL and writing center specialists, particularly in the area of tutor
training, would greatly increase the benefits of writing center
conferencing for L2 writers.
The Relationship of
Lexical Proficiency to the Quality of ESL Compositions
CHERYL A. ENGBER
Northeast Missouri State University
The extent to which
impartial readers take into account lexical richness and lexical errors
when assigning a quality score to compositions written by learners in an
intensive English program is discussed in this article. For placement
purposes into both ESL programs and academic programs, the writing of
these students is often assessed by anonymous readers who base their
judgments on timed writing tasks. Much remains to be known, however, about
the relationship between language proficiency, specifically lexical
proficiency, and reader judgments of the overall quality of timed essays.
This study reports on the role of the lexical component as one factor in
holistic scoring. Sixty-six placement essays written by students from
mixed language backgrounds in the intermediate to advanced range of an
intensive English program were holistically scored. These quality scores
were then compared to four lexical richness measures: lexical variation,
error-free variation, percentage of lexical error, and lexical density.
High, significant correlations were found for (a) lexical variation, that
is, the ratio of the number of different lexical items to the total number
of lexical items in the essay adjusted to length; and (b) lexical
variation minus error. The latter measure, error-free variation,
correlated best with score.
ESL Composition Program
Administration in the United States
JESSICA WILLIAMS
University of Illinois at Chicago
A survey of 78 colleges
and universities was conducted (a) to ascertain the degree to which native
speakers (NSs) and nonnative speakers (NNSs) are instructed separately in
composition classes, and (b) to discover what kinds of instructors
generally teach the NNS composition courses. Results show that academic
NNS composition classes are still generally isolated from NS composition
programs and that they continue to be viewed as remedial at many
institutions. In addition, a well-prepared, permanent staff for the NNS
courses appears to be the exception rather than the rule. Most instructors
are hired part-time and from term to term, often with limited experience
in teaching writing to this population. Suggestions are given for
improvements in teacher preparation and modification of instructional
strategies.
Volume 4, Number 3
(1995)
Reexamining the Affective
Advantage of Peer Feedback in the ESL Writing Class
SHUQIANG ZHANG
University of Hawaii at Manoa
Various arguments have
been made on affective grounds to justify peer feedback in teaching
composition in English as a first language (L1). Those arguments have had
considerable influence on the teaching of English as a second language
(ESL) writing. Based upon current assumptions about the affective values
of teacher-, peer-, and self-directed feedback, hypotheses were formulated
concerning the relative appeal of the three types of feedback in the ESL
writing process. Eighty-one academically oriented ESL learners who had
experienced the three types of feedback responded to a questionnaire, and
their preferences were statistically analyzed. The results show that
claims made about the affective advantage of peer feedback in L1 writing
do not apply to ESL writing. ESL students overwhelmingly prefer teacher
feedback. The findings are discussed in conjunction with the larger issue
of the appropriateness of L1 writing theories as guidelines for ESL
writing research and instruction.
A Contrarian View of
Dialogue Journals: The Case of a Reluctant Participant
VICKI LO HOLMES
MARGARET RO MOULTON
University of Nevada, Las Vegas
Dialogue journal writing
has become a much heralded activity by researchers and practitioners
alike, yet few studies explore the efficacy of this practice from the
students' perspective. Still fewer studies examine the benefits of
dialogue journal writing with adult English as a second language (ESL)
students in a university setting. This study reports the case of Dang, one
of 21 university ESL students who participated in an ethnographic study
exploring students' perspectives on dialogue journal writing. Dang's case
is described because he represents a view contrary to currently made
claims about the benefits of dialogue journal writing. While Dang
benefited from and enjoyed formal writing assignments, he resisted and
disliked the informal writing of the dialogue journals. Implications from
the case of Dang suggest the need for researchers and practitioners to
consider students' perspectives when employing nontraditional writing
assignments like dialogue journal writing.
The Use of Metadiscourse
in Good and Poor ESL Essays
PUANGPEN INTARAPRAWAT
MARGARET S. STEFFENSEN
Illinois State University
A text is composed of two
parts: propositional content and metadiscourse features. Metadiscourse
features are those facets of a text which make the
organization of the text explicit, provide information about the writer's
attitude toward the text content, and engage the reader in the
interaction. In this study, we analyze the metadiscourse in persuasive
essays written by English as a second language (ESL) university students.
Half of the essays received good ratings and half received poor ratings.
Differences between the two sets were found in the number of words, number
of T-units, and density of metadiscourse features. When features were
analyzed as a proportion of number of T-units, differences were found in
all categories. Furthermore, the good essays showed a greater variety of
metadiscourse features within each category than the poor essays. It is
proposed that skilled writers have an awareness of the needs of their
readers and control the strategies for making their texts more considerate
and accessible to the reader. Poor writers, on the other hand, are not
able to generate considerate texts.
NNS Performance on
Writing Proficiency Exams: Focus on Students Who Failed
PATRICIA BYRD
GAYLE NELSON
Georgia State University
An increasing number of
U.S. universities require students to pass a writing proficiency
examination before receiving undergraduate degrees. It is often assumed
that these exams present special problems for nonnative speakers of
English (NNSs). Johns (1991) reported on a case study of one student's
difficulties with a writing proficiency exam. The student performed well
in other courses but failed the required writing exam twice-and had not
passed it prior to publication of the study. In our study, academic
records of 191 NNSs who took a writing examination in 1991 were analyzed
to assess their performance on the writing examination at Georgia State
University (GSU). In addition, profiles of the students who failed were
compiled, in part to determine how common the type of student profiled by
Johns is at GSU. Of the original 191 NNSs, 16 were shown in the
Registrar's record keeping system as still not having passed the writing
exam by December 1994. The analysis shows that only 3 of these 16 students
closely match the Johns profile. Of the remaining 13, 4 have C averages
and 9 have failing grade point averages (GPAs). For these nine, failing
the writing exam is part of an overall pattern of academic difficulty.
Questions remain about the relationship between English proficiency and
academic preparation and about responsibilities for academically weak
students.
|
![[Top]](top.jpg){kind=small}
