Memes of Our Writing

Two memes that depict the students' writing processes.

Writing Processes

Cartoon comparing the writing processes of undergraduate students and expert writers.

Struggling with historical significance: Reasoning, reading, and writing processes

The concept of historical significance is seen as a key concept of historical reasoning. Assigning significance is based on criteria and related to the identity of who assigns significance. However, little is known about reasoning-, reading-, and writing processes when students attribute significance. The aim of this study is to investigate how students and experienced history teachers with a master’s degree reason, read, and write about historical significance while thinking aloud. We analyzed the think-aloud protocols of twelve 10th-grade students and four history teachers on reasoning, reading, and writing processes. While thinking aloud, participants read two contrasting accounts after which they wrote an argumentative text about the historical significance of Christopher Columbus. Analysis of participants’ think-aloud protocols and their written texts showed that students did not recognize historical accounts as perspectives—influenced by the historical context. In contrast, teachers looked for the authors’ judgement, evidence, and context. In addition, students’ limited use of metaknowledge regarding texts and the concept of historical significance hampered them. These out-comes provide direction for teaching reasoning, reading, and writing with respect to historical significance.

Language Learning Strategies: An Action Research Study from a Sociocultural Perspective of Practices in Secondary School English Classes in the Seychelles

<p>Research on language learning strategies (LLS) suggests that LLS are indispensable to helping second language learners learn English (Oxford, Crookall et al. 2008). However, most research studies to date have been experimental and have focused on listing certain aspects of learners' strategy use. By contrast, I have taken a sociocultural approach and carried out a collaborative Action Research project in which I have looked at learners' strategy use as "a cognitive choice and an emergent phenomenon" (Gao 2010, p.20). I have studied English language learning as embedded within social events and occurring as learners interact with people, objects and events in one secondary school in the Seychelles. I used an ethnographic approach which included classroom observation, interviews with teachers and journals, audio-recording and field notes. Phase 1 of my study focused on current practices in three classes. In Phase 2, I analysed the data and reported back to the participating teachers. Common practices in the three classrooms were that the teachers taught students content knowledge only. For example, English lessons emphasized the development of English language literacy skills. In particular the teachers were concerned with getting students to understand ideas and facts about a topic being learnt such as writing a notice. They would also focus on linguistic topics such as grammar and vocabulary knowledge and writing mechanics in general. The teachers were seen as the main transmitters of knowledge while the students had very little voice in their learning, for example, choosing topics, purposes and audience. The students were given very few opportunities to talk among themselves about their work or strategies they used to solve their problems. Teacher talk consisted of giving instructions and asking students questions that tested their knowledge. There were few occasions where the teachers provided instruction that provoked new thinking and understanding about what was being taught. The teachers felt that students depended too much on them for learning and wished to see their students becoming more independent learners, particularly in writing. Thus in Phase 3 of the research, the teachers and I focused on strategy instruction in the process approach to writing instruction with the aim of fostering dialogue among teachers and students about writing processes and problem-solving strategies. The analysis of findings of Phase 3 show that compared to Phase 1, the teachers minimised the practice of being merely transmitters of knowledge. Instead, they altered instruction and mediated learner writing strategies in a number of ways in a dialogic process through classroom instruction, use of collaborative writing tasks, questions and students' L1. However, while this was a step forward in making their students strategic, the teachers were yet to emphasise writing as a more holistic strategic activity which could have been accomplished by modelling their own thinking or self-talk or strategies related to planning, drafting, revising and editing of texts. Evidence also suggests that students used a number of strategies to mediate their own writing processes. These included using their film knowledge, humour, mother tongue, thinking aloud, teacher and peers to help them create text. There were also times when a few students drew on teaching techniques such as teacher-like scaffolding questions to mediate their own and their peers' learning.</p>

Language Learning Strategies: An Action Research Study from a Sociocultural Perspective of Practices in Secondary School English Classes in the Seychelles

<p>Research on language learning strategies (LLS) suggests that LLS are indispensable to helping second language learners learn English (Oxford, Crookall et al. 2008). However, most research studies to date have been experimental and have focused on listing certain aspects of learners' strategy use. By contrast, I have taken a sociocultural approach and carried out a collaborative Action Research project in which I have looked at learners' strategy use as "a cognitive choice and an emergent phenomenon" (Gao 2010, p.20). I have studied English language learning as embedded within social events and occurring as learners interact with people, objects and events in one secondary school in the Seychelles. I used an ethnographic approach which included classroom observation, interviews with teachers and journals, audio-recording and field notes. Phase 1 of my study focused on current practices in three classes. In Phase 2, I analysed the data and reported back to the participating teachers. Common practices in the three classrooms were that the teachers taught students content knowledge only. For example, English lessons emphasized the development of English language literacy skills. In particular the teachers were concerned with getting students to understand ideas and facts about a topic being learnt such as writing a notice. They would also focus on linguistic topics such as grammar and vocabulary knowledge and writing mechanics in general. The teachers were seen as the main transmitters of knowledge while the students had very little voice in their learning, for example, choosing topics, purposes and audience. The students were given very few opportunities to talk among themselves about their work or strategies they used to solve their problems. Teacher talk consisted of giving instructions and asking students questions that tested their knowledge. There were few occasions where the teachers provided instruction that provoked new thinking and understanding about what was being taught. The teachers felt that students depended too much on them for learning and wished to see their students becoming more independent learners, particularly in writing. Thus in Phase 3 of the research, the teachers and I focused on strategy instruction in the process approach to writing instruction with the aim of fostering dialogue among teachers and students about writing processes and problem-solving strategies. The analysis of findings of Phase 3 show that compared to Phase 1, the teachers minimised the practice of being merely transmitters of knowledge. Instead, they altered instruction and mediated learner writing strategies in a number of ways in a dialogic process through classroom instruction, use of collaborative writing tasks, questions and students' L1. However, while this was a step forward in making their students strategic, the teachers were yet to emphasise writing as a more holistic strategic activity which could have been accomplished by modelling their own thinking or self-talk or strategies related to planning, drafting, revising and editing of texts. Evidence also suggests that students used a number of strategies to mediate their own writing processes. These included using their film knowledge, humour, mother tongue, thinking aloud, teacher and peers to help them create text. There were also times when a few students drew on teaching techniques such as teacher-like scaffolding questions to mediate their own and their peers' learning.</p>

Dominant-language Use in Foreign-language Academic Writing Processes

The present pilot study compares the use of the native language during foreign- language writing processes of two students enrolled in a Translation degree program to that of two students enrolled in an English Language and Literature degree program who had not received training in translation or interpreting. Across a range of sub-processes of source-based academic writing, native language use was found to be more frequent in the Translation students’ than in the English students’ think-aloud protocols. Possible relationships between the participants’ patterns of language use and their academic socialization are discussed, as well as the potential that native language use in foreign-language academic writing processes can have to help students improve their foreign-language texts.

Assessing learning transfer and constraining issues in EAP writing practices

The aim of this study was to investigate what learners carry over from a general academic writing course to disciplinary writing settings and the variables constraining the quality of the outcome. Seven EFL university writing teachers and 58 students were selected using purposive and stratified sampling techniques. Data were generated using in-depth interview and document analysis. Thematic analysis and non-parametric statistical tools were employed to analyze the data. The findings showed that the students made limited learning transfer from the writing course to their writing settings across academic discourses. While surface level knowledge of grammatical features show better transfer, skills of discourse level writing processes, thinking strategies and vocabulary showed very poor transfer. A number of reasons are identified for the failure of learning transfer in the study setting. Among others, EAP teachers’ failure to bridge the EFL writing and content area writing practice contributed to this problem. The other variable causing this problem is students’ failure to make significant moves to adapt skills of writing processes and thinking strategies to new situations. Based on these evidences, alternative ways of improving the carryover impact of such courses have been put forward.