Volume 11, Number 1 (2002)
Language-Switching: Using the First Language While Writing in a Second
Language (pp. 7-28)
BILLY R. WOODALL
University of Puerto Rico, Puerto Rico
In a protocol analysis of L2 writing from 28 adult participants (9 L2
Japanese, 11 L2 English, and 8 L2 Spanish), this research observed how
language-switching (L-S), i.e., L1 use in L2 writing, was affected by L2
proficiency, task difficulty, and language group (i.e., the L1/L2
relationship). ANOVA results suggest that less proficient L2 learners
switched to their L1s more frequently than more advanced learners (P
= 0.004), and that more difficult tasks increased the duration of L1 use in
L2 writing (P ≤ 0.001). For students of a cognate language, longer
periods of L1 use were related to higher quality L2 texts; for students of a
non-cognate language, L-S was related to lower quality texts. Possible
reasons for L-S are discussed with examples from the protocols, and
suggestions for including L-S in L2 writing models are made.
Responding to Sentence-Level Errors in Writing (pp. 29-47)
ROBERT YATES
Central Missouri State University, USA
JAMES KENKEL
Eastern Kentucky University, USA
The debate between Truscott (1996, 1999) and Ferris (1999) on responding
to student errors in writing underscores how difficult this issue is for
writing teachers. Conventionally, pedagogies have looked at errors
separately from principles of text construction. From an interlanguage
perspective, we argue that many perplexing errors are the result of the
interaction between developing linguistic competence and basic principles of
ordering information in texts which learners already know. We show how this
interaction results in errors at the sentence-level. These insights are
applied to published comments and corrections of sentence-level errors in
student writing. Based on the interlanguage perspective we propose, our
analysis of these comments and corrections show how teachers may
misinterpret a learner's text. The framework we propose situates students'
sentence-level errors within their developing skill in constructing
target-like texts and provides teachers with another perspective on such
errors.
Using Portfolios to Assess the Writing of ESL Students: A Powerful
Alternative? (pp. 49-72)
BAILIN SONG
BONNE AUGUST
Kingsborough Community College, City University of New York, USA
This article describes a quantitative study that compared the performance
of two groups of advanced ESL students in ENG 22, a second semester
composition course. Both groups had been enrolled in ENG C2, a compensatory
version of Freshman English for students with scores one level below passing
on the CUNY Writing Assessment Test (WAT). At the end of ENG C2, one group
was assessed on the basis of portfolios, as well as the CUNY WAT; the other
was assessed using the WAT. Comparable percentages of students in both
groups passed the WAT at the end of C2. However, students from the portfolio
group with passing portfolios were permitted to advance to ENG 22 regardless
of their performance on the WAT, while students in the non-portfolio group
moved ahead only if they had passed the WAT. (The WAT remained a graduation
requirement for all students.) The study found that students were twice as
likely to pass into ENG 22 from ENG C2 when they were evaluated by portfolio
than when they were required to pass the WAT. Nevertheless, at the end of
ENG 22, the pass rate and grade distribution for the two groups were nearly
identical. Because portfolio assessment was able to identify more than twice
the number of ESL students who proved successful in the next English course,
however, it seems a more appropriate assessment alternative for the ESL
population.
Volume 11, Number 2 (2002)
High School Student Perceptions of First
Language Literacy Instruction: Implications for Second Language Writing
(pp. 91-116)
HIROE KOBAYASHI
CAROL RINNERT
Hiroshima
University, Japan
The overall goal of this study is to
clarify the nature of Japanese students' first language (L1) writing
experience and instruction in high school to help university second
language (L2) English writing teachers understand their students' needs.
Building on the results of a previous large-scale questionnaire study of
Japanese (N=389) and American students (N=66), this interview study
attempts to gain insight into Japanese L1 literacy instruction in high
school through individual students' experiences. The questionnaire study
had indicated that Japanese high school language classes provide
significantly more instruction in reading than writing and significantly
less emphasis on writing than American classes. However, analysis of the
data from in-depth interviews (N=21) presented here reveals a more complex
picture. Most notably, many Japanese high schools provide intensive
writing instruction and practice, outside of regular Japanese classes, to
help increasing numbers of individual students prepare for essay writing
on university entrance exams. The results of the study call into question
the common assumption that Japanese high school students receive little
training related to L1 writing. The findings suggest specific ways for
teachers to draw on students' strengths in terms of their literacy
background to help them bridge the gap between their L1 and L2 writing
skills.
Student/Teacher Interaction via Email:
The Social Context of Internet Discourse (pp. 117-134)
JOEL BLOCH
The Ohio State University, USA
While email has been used in L2
composition classrooms as a way to develop fluency, it can also be used as
a means of creating and sustaining relationships, as it is often used
outside the classroom. This paper examines the way students in a
graduate-level ESL course used email on their own initiative to interact
with their instructor. The paper examines 120 email messages received by
the instructor during the course and categorizes them into four areas: (1)
phatic communion, (2) asking for help, (3) making excuses, and (4) making
formal requests. From these categories, representative samples were chosen
to illustrate what rhetorical strategies the writers used to achieve their
purpose for sending the email messages. The results show that the students
were able to employ a wide variety of rhetorical strategies to interact
with their instructor outside of the traditional classroom setting. For
these students, email seemed to be an important means for interacting with
their instructor. Moreover, the students exhibited a good ability to
switch between formal and informal language, depending upon the rhetorical
context of the message. In the conclusion, some of the issues regarding
teaching the use of email are discussed.
Teaching Coherence to ESL Students: A
Classroom Inquiry (pp. 135-159)
ICY LEE
Hong Kong Baptist University, China
"Coherence" is traditionally described as
the relationships that link the ideas in a text to create meaning for the
readers. It is often regarded as a fuzzy concept which is difficult to
teach and learn. This paper describes a classroom inquiry which
investigated the teaching of coherence. In this study, coherence was
defined in terms of a number of coherence-creating devices, and
pedagogical materials were designed accordingly to teach the concept to a
group of 16 ESL university students in Hong Kong. Data was collected from
their pre- and post-revision drafts, think-aloud protocols during
revisions, as well as post-study questionnaires and interviews. The
findings suggest that at the end of the explicit teaching of coherence,
students improved the coherence of their writing and directed their
attention to the discourse level of texts while revising. They also felt
that the teaching of coherence had enhanced their awareness of what
effective writing should entail. The paper concludes with insights gained
from the classroom inquiry.
Volume 11, Number 3 (2002)
Critiquing Voice as a Viable Pedagogical Tool in L2 Writing: Returning
the Spotlight to Ideas (pp. 177-190)
PAUL STAPLETON
Hokkaido University, Japan
The issue of voice, authorial identity, or authorial presence in L2
writing has recently received considerable attention from second language
researchers. Much of this research has concluded that voice is an integral
part of writing and that it should, therefore, become an essential
component of second language writing pedagogy. With a particular focus on
many of the discursive elements of voice, authorial identity, and
authorial presence isolated by this research, this paper critically
assesses the body of research and claims that the case for voice in second
language pedagogy has been overstated. Furthermore, it is argued that
extended discussions about voice may be misleading teachers and students
into believing that expressions of identity take precedence over ideas and
argumentation. It is concluded that research on L2 academic writing would
be better directed towards argumentation skills and ideas than voice.
A Modern History of Written Discourse Analysis (pp. 191-223)
ROBERT B. KAPLAN
University of Southern California (Emeritus), USA
WILLIAM GRABE
Northern Arizona University, USA
The term discourse analysis has been used interchangeably in two
separate contexts -- spoken discourse (i.e., multiple-source dialogic) and
written discourse (i.e., single-source monologic). Such a distinction,
however, oversimplifies the situation; while there are obvious overlaps
between the two, to some extent each has evolved in its own direction.
Written discourse analysis, the subject of our discussion, is obviously
closely connected with work in literacy, but it implicates a great
heterogeneity of topics and approaches, including at least some from
psycholinguistics and sociolinguistics. Discourse analysis, in the sense in
which we are using it, emerged in the early 1970s. A modern history of
written discourse analysis is perhaps best covered within a 40-50-year time
span. In the course of that time, a number of new and emerging disciplines
and research fields have contributed to systematic analyses of the
linguistic features and patterns occurring in written texts. At the same
time, other continuing disciplines have provided contributions that have
been important and are ongoing. It should be fairly evident that any attempt
to cover such a broad spectrum of views and disciplines would not be
appropriate in a single article. We therefore intend to limit the scope of
this paper to analyses of written discourse that explore the actual
structuring of the text via some consistent framework. Our goal is to
highlight and describe historically the various efforts to find the
structures and linguistic patterns in texts that contribute to how they are
understood, interpreted, and used. It seems to us that, in order to
comprehend what has happened in the context of L2 writing research, it is
necessary to understand the extensive work that has been done in discourse
analysis.
L1 Use in the L2 Composing Process: An Exploratory Study of 16 Chinese
EFL Writers (pp. 225-246)
WENYU WANG
QIUFANG WEN
Nanjing University, China
This paper reports a study on how ESL/EFL writers use their L1 (first
language) when composing in their L2 (second language) and how such L1 use
is affected by L2 proficiency and writing tasks. Sixteen Chinese EFL
learners were asked to compose aloud on two tasks, narration and
argumentation. Analyses of their think-aloud protocols revealed that these
student writers had both their L1 and L2 at their disposal when composing in
their L2. They were more likely to rely on L1 when they were managing their
writing processes, generating and organizing ideas, but more likely to rely
on L2 when undertaking task-examining and text-generating activities.
Additionally, more L1 use was found in the narrative writing task than in
the argumentative writing. Finally, the think-aloud protocols reflected that
L1 use decreased with the writer's L2 development, but the extent of the
decline of L1 use in individual activities varied. Based on these findings,
an L2 composing process model is proposed
Volume 11, Number 4 (2002)
Special
Issue: Early Second Language Writing
Guest Editors: Paul Kei Matsuda and Kevin Eric De Pew
Early Second Language Writing: An Introduction (pp. 261-268)
PAUL KEI MATSUDA
University of New Hampshire, USA
KEVIN ERIC DE PEW
Purdue University, USA
In this introduction to the special issue on early second language
writing, special issue editors discuss the need to pay more attention to
the issue of early second language writing--defined as the development of
L2 literacy from the writer's first encounter with a second language
through the completion of secondary education. After a brief review of
studies in early L2 writing, possible reasons for the dearth of studies
addressing this important area is discussed, followed by an overview of
perspectives represented in this special issue.
Emergent Biliteracy in Chinese and English (pp. 269-293)
JAN K. BUCKWALTER
YI-HSUAN GLORIA LO
Indiana University, USA
Will teaching children to read and write in two languages in the school
environment lead to confusion and possible interference in the literacy
learning process? By focusing on the emergent Chinese and English literacy
of a 5-year-old boy from Taiwan, this research provides insights into the
debate within the field of bilingual education as to whether the
introduction of literacy in languages with two different writing systems
helps or hinders literacy development in both languages. The researchers
involved the participant in a variety of interactive reading and writing
activities and games, both in English and Chinese, for 1.5-2 hours a week
over the course of 15 weeks. Drawing on Cummins's (1991) Common Underlying
Proficiency Hypothesis, data was coded, analyzed and organized into two
categories: the Foundational Level Emergent Literacy Awareness and the
Surface Level Emergent Literacy Awareness. Results suggest that
Foundational Level Awareness, literacy awareness that applies to either
language, is characterized by the intentionality of print, the match
between written and spoken words, and the conventions of print. The
Surface Level Awareness, literacy awareness unique to each writing system,
is differentiated into two distinct categories that pertain to the
specifics of the writing systems of English and Chinese. Discussions
center on the relationship between Chinese literacy and English literacy,
the impact on biliteracy over time, and the participant's future literacy
development. Implications for biliteracy research, development, knowledge,
and pedagogy are suggested.
Seeing the Invisible: Situating L2 Literacy in Child-Teacher
Interaction (pp. 295-310)
LINDA LONON BLANTON
University of New Orleans, USA
The author revisits her earlier qualitative research on ESL children's
emergence into literacy, which she conducted with 5- and 6-year olds at a
multilingual K-12 school in Casablanca, Morocco. Through further
reflection and study, she arrives at the notion of "synchronicity"--a
dynamic oneness between teacher and child--as the distinguishing feature
of three classrooms where children's literacy development was taking place
at an extraordinary pace. This work presents readers with new insights
into the affective complexities of child-teacher interaction and its role
in literacy development.
Learning to Make Things Happen in Different Ways: Causality in the
Writing of Middle-Grade English Language Learners (pp. 311-328)
DUDLEY W. REYNOLDS
University of Houston, USA
This study addresses two issues: the similarity between L1 and L2
writing development and the nature of the developmental path. The
frequency of two types of causality markers in 5th-8th grade essays
written by 189 students in ESL and 546 students in regular language arts
classes is analyzed. Students wrote on one of two informative "how-to"
prompts. The regular language arts students were found to differ in their
usage of causality markers between the two topics, whereas the ESL
students used the markers similarly across both topics. There were no
differences between students at different grade levels in either group. In
addition, the ESL students were found to have higher usage of causality
markers in general than the regular language arts students. It is
suggested that the developmental path for both groups involves moving away
from primarily narrative expansion of topic towards display of diverse
language forms and discourse strategies.
The Role of Writing in Classroom Second Language Acquisition
(pp. 329-350)
LINDA HARKLAU
University of Georgia, USA
This paper argues that writing should play a more prominent role in
classroom-based studies of second language acquisition. It contends that
an implicit emphasis on spoken language is the result of the historical
development of the field of applied linguistics and parent disciplines of
structuralist linguistics, linguistic anthropology, and child language
development. Although writing as a communicative modality has been
marginalized, it is key to understanding second language acquisition in
contexts such as elementary and secondary level content area classrooms
where literacy plays a central role in communication and transmission of
subject matter. In all, the paper argues that while it is important for
classroom-based studies to investigate how students learn how to write in
a second language, it is equally important to learn how students learn a
second language through writing. Implications of this perspective are
noted for notions of learner and target language variation, multimodality
and language socialization, and interactionist approaches to classroom
research.
.
|