Integrating process and genre into the second language writing classroom: Research into practice

2013 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 382-393 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juval V. Racelis ◽  
Paul Kei Matsuda

The field of second language (L2) writing has moved beyond the false dichotomies between process- and genre-based pedagogies perpetuated in the 1980s and 1990s, but there has still been little research on how the two are actually reconciled in the classroom. Consequently, L2 writing instructors are left with an incomplete picture, unsure how to incorporate such research into their own classrooms. This paper describes how one teacher, Juval, encountered the research on process- and genre-based pedagogies and negotiated his understanding of this research into his practice. Alongside Juval's voice is the voice of a teacher educator, Paul, setting these frameworks in the context of larger developments in the field of L2 writing. Their discussion takes Juval from his initial view of writing as a grammar-elicitation task to his resort to research for answers to the complex needs of his students. With further support from colleagues, Juval reaches a place where the two pedagogies are not only reconciled but work together to prepare his students for their writing tasks. His narrative chimes with the experience of many L2 writing teachers and should inspire novice and experienced teachers to reflect on their relationship with theory and research.

2010 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Norman W. Evans ◽  
K. James Hartshorn ◽  
Emily Allen Tuioti

Considerable attention has been given to written corrective feedback (WCF) in second language writing (L2) over the past several decades. One of the central questions has focused on the appropriateness of its use in L2 writing. In these academic discussions, scholars frequently describe how WCF is utilized in the classroom. However, many of these claims of teacher practice have no research base, since few studies have actually asked teachers what place WCF has in their writing classroom (Ferris, et al., in press/2011a; Ferris, et al., in press/2011b; Hyland, 2003; Lee, 2004). This paucity of data from teachers about their WCF practices is problematic. Understanding teacher perspectives on corrective feedback is integral to our understanding the place of WCF in L2 writing pedagogy. Accordingly, this article reports on a study that asks two fundamental research questions: (a) To what extent do current L2 writing teachers provide WCF? and (b) What determines whether or not practitioners choose to provide WCF? These questions were answered by means of an international survey completed by 1,053 L2 writing practitioners in 69 different countries. Results suggest that WCF is commonly practiced in L2 pedagogy by experienced and well-educated L2 practitioners for sound pedagogical reasons.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 423-444
Author(s):  
Barry Lee Reynolds ◽  
Mark Feng Teng

The study examined the types of written corrective feedback given by second language writing teachers on Taiwanese secondary school students’ collocation errors. First, the written corrective feedback that teachers provided on learners’ word choice errors was examined to uncover the types of feedback provided. Then, analysis focused on verb–noun collocations to draw attention to how students had been receiving different types of written corrective feedback from teachers on a single collocation error type. Results showed that some sentences tagged as including word choice errors only contained rule-based errors. Furthermore, for verb-noun collocation errors, teachers chose to provide indirect and direct feedback almost equally at the expense of metalinguistic feedback. Based on the results, we suggested options for second language writing teachers when providing feedback on word choice errors.


2010 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 181-201 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dana R. Ferris

For more than a decade now, a great deal of research has been done on the topic of written corrective feedback (CF) in SLA and second language (L2) writing. Nonetheless, what those research efforts really have shown as well as the possible implications for practice remain in dispute. Although L2 writing and SLA researchers often examine similar phenomena in similar ways, they do not necessarily ask the same questions. SLA-focused researchers investigate whether written CF facilitates the acquisition of particular linguistic features. In contrast, L2 writing researchers generally emphasize the question of whether written CF helps student writers improve the overall effectiveness of their texts. Understanding these differences in starting points is important because it provides a possible explanation for the conflicting methodologies and conclusions of various reviews on this topic (e.g., Ferris, 2003, 2004; Truscott, 1996, 2007). This article briefly traces the history of these two parallel lines of research on written CF and notes both contrasts and convergences. It then moves to a focused discussion of the possible implications and applications of this body of work for the L2 language and writing classroom and for future research efforts.


2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Khaled Barkaoui

This article reviews theories and research on revision in second-language (L2) writing. It examines how and what L2 writers revise, compares the revision practices of skilled and unskilled L2 writers, and suggests instructional practices to help learners improve their L2 revision skills.


Author(s):  
Jalil Fathi ◽  
Sara Mohebiniya ◽  
Saeed Nourzadeh

The purpose of the present study was to investigate the effect of self-assessment and peer-assessment activities on second language (L2) writing self-regulation of Iranian English-as-a-foreign-language (EFL) learners. For this purpose, a sample of forty-six English major students from two intact classes at an Iranian Islamic Azad University were recruited as the participants of the present study. Then, the two classes were randomly assigned to a self-assessment group (N=22) and a peer-assessment group (N=24). The self-assessment group was instructed on the writing assessment criteria in order to self-assess their writing tasks and the peer-assessment group was trained on how to assess the writings of their peers. The treatment carried out for the self-assessment and peer-assessment groups lasted for a period of one university semester. The data was collected through Second Language Writing Self-regulation (SLWS) administered as the pre-test and post-test of the study. The results obtained from the data analysis indicated that both self-assessment and peer-assessment were conducive in enhancing L2 writing self-regulation of the participants. Nevertheless, further analysis of the data indicated that the participants in the peer-assessment group were better than those in the self-assessment group with regard to writing self-regulation, suggesting that peer-assessment activities were more effective than the self-assessment activities in contributing to enhancing writing self-regulation of the EFL learners. The justification of the findings and their implications for L2 writing pedagogy are also discussed.


2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 112-139
Author(s):  
Ehsan Abbaspour

Whether corrective feedback is effective in L2 writing has always been a controversial issue among Second Language Acquisition (SLA) scholars despite a vast body of research investigating the issue. This conflict is rooted in the fact that different researchers subscribe to different theories of SLA which are at times contradictory in nature. The present article reviews and investigates major SLA theories with respect to their views and stance toward the efficacy of Written Corrective Feedback (WCF) and error correction in second language writing. Many of these theories do not address the role of corrective feedback explicitly or merely focus on the role of oral feedback. Polio (2012) and Bitchener and Ferris (2012) have partially investigated the issue at stake reviewing a number of SLA theories. In this study, however, attempt is made to shed light on the role of WCF especially in the theories which are not directly concerned with L2 writing.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document