scholarly journals Planning in L1 and L2 writing: Working memory, process, and product – CORRIGENDUM

2020 ◽  
Vol 53 (4) ◽  
pp. 537-537
Author(s):  
Mark D. Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
L2 Writing ◽  
Memory Process ◽  
L1 And L2 Writing ◽  
L1 And L2

Planning in L1 and L2 writing: Working memory, process, and product

2020 ◽  
Vol 53 (4) ◽  
pp. 433-445 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark D. Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Task Complexity ◽  
L2 Writing ◽  
View Planning ◽  
Writing Research ◽  
L1 And L2 Writing ◽  
L1 And L2 ◽  
Research Domain

The study of planning in second language (L2) writing research is heavily influenced by two research domains: (a) early research on cognition in first language (L1) composing processes and (b) second language acquisition (SLA) research. The first research domain has been instrumental in determining the specific systems and processes involved in composing and has led to widely accepted models of L1 writing (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1987*; Flower & Hayes, 1980*; Hayes, 1996, 2012) as well as a widely accepted model of the interaction between working memory and L1 writing systems (Kellogg, 1996*; Kellogg, Whiteford, Turner, Cahill, & Mertens, 2013). The influence of these early studies is still felt in process approaches to composition instruction commonly implemented in L1 and L2 writing classes. The second research domain—SLA and more specifically task-based language teaching/learning—has come to view planning as a feature of task complexity that can be manipulated to facilitate the production of language that is complex (syntactically and/or lexically), accurate, and/or fluent (Robinson, 2011*; Skehan, 1998*; Skehan & Foster, 2001). This research timeline traces the study of planning in L2 writing in each of these domains by reviewing key L1 and L2 writing research over the last 30-plus years and by highlighting each study's findings. Prior to presenting the timeline, the following sections provide backgrounds in each of the domains noted above and situate planning within those domains.

scholarly journals The Exploration of Skilled and Less-Skilled EFL Graduate Students' on L1 and L2 Writing Strategies

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 517
Author(s):  
Syaadiah Arifin
Keyword(s):  
Graduate Students ◽  
English Education ◽  
L2 Writing ◽  
Writing Strategies ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Think Aloud Protocols ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Cyclical Process ◽  
L1 And L2 Writing ◽  
L1 And L2

This study aims to analyze the similarities, differences, and transferability of students' writing strategies in L1 (Indonesian) and L2 (English). Data were obtained from four participants majoring in English Education, two males and two females, which were categorized into skilled and less-skilled writers. The data were collected for four months using various methods, namely think-aloud protocols (TAPs), retrospective and semi-structured interviews, observations, and written drafts. The result showed that students employed similar personal strategies while writing in Indonesian (L1) and English (L2). This means that they transferred L1 strategies to L2 with some variances and similarities. The skilled writers viewed writing as a cyclical process of planning, writing, reading/rereading, rehearsing, and revising their texts. Meanwhile, less-skilled writers tended to employ linear and less recursive strategies. Furthermore, subsequent studies need to be conducted using these research findings and suggestions.

The implications of cognitive models in L1 and L2 writing

1993 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 203-225 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanne Devine ◽  
Kevin Railey ◽  
Philip Boshoff
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Models ◽  
L2 Writing ◽  
L1 And L2 Writing ◽  
L1 And L2

Understanding changes in elementary Mandarin students’ L1 and L2 writing

2005 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 71-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah J. McCarthey ◽  
Yi-Huey Guo ◽  
Sunday Cummins
Keyword(s):  
L2 Writing ◽  
L1 And L2 Writing ◽  
L1 And L2

scholarly journals L2 Writing and L1 Composition in English: Towards an alignment of effort

2008 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 139-155
Author(s):  
Beverly Anne Baker
Keyword(s):  
Linguistic Diversity ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Linguistically Diverse ◽  
L2 Writing ◽  
Language Diversity ◽  
American University ◽  
Mainstream Composition ◽  
L1 And L2 Writing ◽  
L1 And L2 ◽  
Diverse Groups

Abstract In North American university contexts, the language diversity found in English mainstream composition (“L1”) classrooms resembles more and more that found in ESL (“L2”) writing classrooms. As these two groups become less differentiated, those specifically trained in L2 writing might well wonder whether the needs of the non-native speakers of English are acknowledged and addressed in the mainstream classrooms. The author examines several different theoretical constructs that have informed and continue to inform the literature on L1 composition pedagogy, demonstrating that some of these allow for the inclusion of linguistically diverse groups better than others. Fortunately, the recent turn to social and critical approaches to teaching composition reflect well the preoccupations of both L1 and L2 writing teachers. More and more attention is being paid to discussions of “linguistic diversity,” a term which now includes non-native speakers. This suggests a future convergence in the activities of instructors of L1 and L2 writing, leading to benefits for linguistically diverse groups.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document