Heidi Byrnes, & Rosa M. Manchon (eds.) (2014) Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. Pp. 299.
Heidi Byrnes， & Rosa M. Manchon(编)(2014)阿姆斯特丹/费城:John Benjamins出版社。299页。
{"title":"Task-Based Language Learning – Insights from and for L2 Writing","authors":"Yu Li","doi":"10.1558/wap.v8i1.28441","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1558/wap.v8i1.28441","url":null,"abstract":"Heidi Byrnes, & Rosa M. Manchon (eds.) (2014) Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. Pp. 299.","PeriodicalId":42573,"journal":{"name":"Writing & Pedagogy","volume":"52 1","pages":"237-242"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2016-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87242915","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Writing in a second language, especially using new technologies, is fraught with difficulties for most students. There are two main challenges, firstly, how can students move from their understanding of the mechanical aspects of texts (good sentence structure and appropriate lexis) to deal with issues of how to construct texts that go beyond the basics, for instance drawing upon multiple modes of expression, and secondly, how can students use their knowledge about new technologies to help them create texts? This paper examines the collaborative processes English for Science students go through when constructing a scientific text for a popular audience, here, a digital video scientific documentary. Undergraduate students had to work in groups to write the text for a digital story based on an experiment they had undertaken. As part of the process these students had to prepare a script which was then recorded, either speaking directly to the camera, or as a voice over onto the video to complement their video images. Based on examples from the students’ generated data: Facebook, WhatsApp posts and scripts, we see that the end product was rich and informative. It is maintained that a collaborative approach using new technologies to writing such popular scientific texts engages the students with their work and that, when given the opportunity, they learn from each other as much as from their teacher.
{"title":"Collaborative script writing for a digital media project","authors":"Lindsay Miller","doi":"10.1558/WAP.V8I1.27593","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1558/WAP.V8I1.27593","url":null,"abstract":"Writing in a second language, especially using new technologies, is fraught with difficulties for most students. There are two main challenges, firstly, how can students move from their understanding of the mechanical aspects of texts (good sentence structure and appropriate lexis) to deal with issues of how to construct texts that go beyond the basics, for instance drawing upon multiple modes of expression, and secondly, how can students use their knowledge about new technologies to help them create texts? This paper examines the collaborative processes English for Science students go through when constructing a scientific text for a popular audience, here, a digital video scientific documentary. Undergraduate students had to work in groups to write the text for a digital story based on an experiment they had undertaken. As part of the process these students had to prepare a script which was then recorded, either speaking directly to the camera, or as a voice over onto the video to complement their video images. Based on examples from the students’ generated data: Facebook, WhatsApp posts and scripts, we see that the end product was rich and informative. It is maintained that a collaborative approach using new technologies to writing such popular scientific texts engages the students with their work and that, when given the opportunity, they learn from each other as much as from their teacher.","PeriodicalId":42573,"journal":{"name":"Writing & Pedagogy","volume":"304 1","pages":"215-228"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2016-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86911643","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper introduces five linked resources and demonstrates, with a focus on Business, Economics and Engineering, their use in a novel genre-instantiation approach to teaching academic writing. The resources centre on the British Academic Written English (BAWE) corpus. They are: (1) published research literature that investigates the student assignment genres and registers; (2) descriptions of the contents of the corpus; (3) the BAWE corpus itself, which can be freely searched by teachers and learners; (4) online teaching materials based on the above; and (5) lesson plans from EAP teachers who use these materials in their teaching of presessional and in-sessional academic English. The genre instantiation approach to teaching academic writing builds on two central principles: the identification of key genres for target discipline-levels, and the exemplification of these through instances of successful student writing. This enables teachers to develop programmes that raise genre awareness, where learners can engage with instances from across specific topics, courses, levels and disciplines. The genre-instantiation approach is illustrated here with specific reference to Business Case Studies, Economics Essays and Engineering Methodology Recounts.
{"title":"A genre-instantiation approach to teaching English for Specific Academic Purposes: Student writing in Business, Economics and Engineering","authors":"Sheena Gardner","doi":"10.1558/WAP.V8I1.27934","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1558/WAP.V8I1.27934","url":null,"abstract":"This paper introduces five linked resources and demonstrates, with a focus on Business, Economics and Engineering, their use in a novel genre-instantiation approach to teaching academic writing. The resources centre on the British Academic Written English (BAWE) corpus. They are: (1) published research literature that investigates the student assignment genres and registers; (2) descriptions of the contents of the corpus; (3) the BAWE corpus itself, which can be freely searched by teachers and learners; (4) online teaching materials based on the above; and (5) lesson plans from EAP teachers who use these materials in their teaching of presessional and in-sessional academic English. The genre instantiation approach to teaching academic writing builds on two central principles: the identification of key genres for target discipline-levels, and the exemplification of these through instances of successful student writing. This enables teachers to develop programmes that raise genre awareness, where learners can engage with instances from across specific topics, courses, levels and disciplines. The genre-instantiation approach is illustrated here with specific reference to Business Case Studies, Economics Essays and Engineering Methodology Recounts.","PeriodicalId":42573,"journal":{"name":"Writing & Pedagogy","volume":"63 1","pages":"149-176"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2016-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79505087","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This introductory review article for this special issue sets out a range of issues in play as far as English for Academic Purposes (EAP) writing is concerned, but with a special emphasis on English for Specific Academic Purposes (ESAP) (as opposed to English for General Academic Purposes (EGAP)). Following the introduction, the article begins by outlining the different types of EAP and presenting the pros and cons of ESAP and EGAP for writing. It then goes on to review work in a range of areas of relevance to ESAP writing. These areas are register and discourse analysis; genre analysis; corpus analysis; ethnography; contrastive rhetoric; classroom methodology; critical approaches; and assessment. The article concludes by arguing that whichever model of writing is chosen (EGAP or ESAP), or if a hybrid model is the choice, if at all possible, students need to be exposed to the understandings, language and communicative activities of their target disciplines, with students themselves also contributing to this enterprise.
{"title":"English for Specific Academic Purposes (ESAP) Writing: Making the case","authors":"J. Flowerdew","doi":"10.1558/WAP.V8I1.30051","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1558/WAP.V8I1.30051","url":null,"abstract":"This introductory review article for this special issue sets out a range of issues in play as far as English for Academic Purposes (EAP) writing is concerned, but with a special emphasis on English for Specific Academic Purposes (ESAP) (as opposed to English for General Academic Purposes (EGAP)). Following the introduction, the article begins by outlining the different types of EAP and presenting the pros and cons of ESAP and EGAP for writing. It then goes on to review work in a range of areas of relevance to ESAP writing. These areas are register and discourse analysis; genre analysis; corpus analysis; ethnography; contrastive rhetoric; classroom methodology; critical approaches; and assessment. The article concludes by arguing that whichever model of writing is chosen (EGAP or ESAP), or if a hybrid model is the choice, if at all possible, students need to be exposed to the understandings, language and communicative activities of their target disciplines, with students themselves also contributing to this enterprise.","PeriodicalId":42573,"journal":{"name":"Writing & Pedagogy","volume":"1 1","pages":"5-32"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2016-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89444346","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Academic literacy and student diversity: The case for inclusive practice Ursula Wingate (2015) ISBN-13: 978-1783093472. Pp. 208. Genre-based automated writing evaluation for L2 research writing: From design to evaluation and enhancement Elena Cotos (2014) ISBN-13: 978-1137333360. Pp. 302.
{"title":"Academic literacy and student diversity: The case for inclusive practice Ursula Wingate (2015) and Genre-based automated writing evaluation for L2 research writing: From design to evaluation and enhancement Elena Cotos (2014)","authors":"Carrie Aldrich, Amanda Gallogly","doi":"10.1558/WAP.V8I1.27807","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1558/WAP.V8I1.27807","url":null,"abstract":"Academic literacy and student diversity: The case for inclusive practice Ursula Wingate (2015) ISBN-13: 978-1783093472. Pp. 208. \u0000 \u0000Genre-based automated writing evaluation for L2 research writing: From design to evaluation and enhancement Elena Cotos (2014) ISBN-13: 978-1137333360. Pp. 302.","PeriodicalId":42573,"journal":{"name":"Writing & Pedagogy","volume":"55 1","pages":"229-235"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2016-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81368800","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In Australian universities, doctoral research results in the production of a thesis of between 80,000–100,000 words produced by the student under the guidance of a supervisor. There is no compulsory coursework component. Recent years have seen an increase in the range of activities provided at research-intensive universities to support doctoral writing. These activities are often aimed at both native and non-native speakers of English and range from compulsory or optional courses to workshops, writing groups and boot-camps. This article discusses the approach taken to supporting doctoral writing via an analysis of the support provided through the Learning Centre at UNSW Australia. The article discusses the rationale for the approach taken, describes the programmes on offer and considers the challenges facing a small centrally-located unit that provides writing support at a large Australian university.
{"title":"Supporting doctoral writing at an Australian university","authors":"S. Starfield","doi":"10.1558/WAP.V8I1.27632","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1558/WAP.V8I1.27632","url":null,"abstract":"In Australian universities, doctoral research results in the production of a thesis of between 80,000–100,000 words produced by the student under the guidance of a supervisor. There is no compulsory coursework component. Recent years have seen an increase in the range of activities provided at research-intensive universities to support doctoral writing. These activities are often aimed at both native and non-native speakers of English and range from compulsory or optional courses to workshops, writing groups and boot-camps. This article discusses the approach taken to supporting doctoral writing via an analysis of the support provided through the Learning Centre at UNSW Australia. The article discusses the rationale for the approach taken, describes the programmes on offer and considers the challenges facing a small centrally-located unit that provides writing support at a large Australian university.","PeriodicalId":42573,"journal":{"name":"Writing & Pedagogy","volume":"56 1","pages":"177-198"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2016-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75328431","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2015-07-20DOI: 10.1558/WAP.V7I2-3.16672
R. Ruegg
Although many second language writing classes use a process approach, anecdotal evidence suggests that assessment of writing in such classes often still focuses on the written product alone. This assessment practice continues despite specialists having recommended that both process and product be assessed. This study compares second-year university students in Japan who were assessed on feedback processes and product with others assessed on product alone in terms of perceptions of the feedback received. Perceptions were determined through a post-treatment questionnaire. Neither the assessment of the use of teacher feedback in revisions nor the assessment of the quality and quantity of peer feedback was found to have a clear benefit in terms of students’ perceptions of the feedback received. This finding suggests the need for further research to confirm whether the assessment of both process and product is worth the considerable time investment required.
{"title":"The Influence of Assessment of Classroom Writing on Feedback Processes and Product vs. on Product Alone","authors":"R. Ruegg","doi":"10.1558/WAP.V7I2-3.16672","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1558/WAP.V7I2-3.16672","url":null,"abstract":"Although many second language writing classes use a process approach, anecdotal evidence suggests that assessment of writing in such classes often still focuses on the written product alone. This assessment practice continues despite specialists having recommended that both process and product be assessed. This study compares second-year university students in Japan who were assessed on feedback processes and product with others assessed on product alone in terms of perceptions of the feedback received. Perceptions were determined through a post-treatment questionnaire. Neither the assessment of the use of teacher feedback in revisions nor the assessment of the quality and quantity of peer feedback was found to have a clear benefit in terms of students’ perceptions of the feedback received. This finding suggests the need for further research to confirm whether the assessment of both process and product is worth the considerable time investment required.","PeriodicalId":42573,"journal":{"name":"Writing & Pedagogy","volume":"259 1","pages":"261-277"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2015-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75769200","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2015-07-18DOI: 10.1558/WAP.V7I2-3.25991
Arlan A. Parreño
This quasi-experimental study examined the efficacy of the three types of written corrective feedback (WCF), namely, direct, indirect and coded WCF, and the no-correction approach. A diary study on student responses to WCF was also conducted. The one-semester investigation involved 68 Thai students in an undergraduate English course. Results showed that the three WCF types had significantly better revision effects than the no-correction approach, but only the coded WCF produced significant delayed effect. However, analyses of diary entries suggested no general accuracy improvement in any group. Diary study results indicated that, although all groups reported awareness of similar actions, and positive attitudes towards WCF, the coded WCF group seemed more aware of the WCF than the other groups. Findings suggest that focused coded WCF helps in learning English as an L2, although its role in L2 acquisition remains to be seen.
{"title":"Written Corrective Feedback Impact on Grammatical Accuracy in L2 Writing: A Quantitative and Qualitative Look","authors":"Arlan A. Parreño","doi":"10.1558/WAP.V7I2-3.25991","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1558/WAP.V7I2-3.25991","url":null,"abstract":"This quasi-experimental study examined the efficacy of the three types of written corrective feedback (WCF), namely, direct, indirect and coded WCF, and the no-correction approach. A diary study on student responses to WCF was also conducted. The one-semester investigation involved 68 Thai students in an undergraduate English course. Results showed that the three WCF types had significantly better revision effects than the no-correction approach, but only the coded WCF produced significant delayed effect. However, analyses of diary entries suggested no general accuracy improvement in any group. Diary study results indicated that, although all groups reported awareness of similar actions, and positive attitudes towards WCF, the coded WCF group seemed more aware of the WCF than the other groups. Findings suggest that focused coded WCF helps in learning English as an L2, although its role in L2 acquisition remains to be seen.","PeriodicalId":42573,"journal":{"name":"Writing & Pedagogy","volume":"23 1","pages":"279-303"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2015-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83298383","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2015-07-18DOI: 10.1558/WAP.V7I2-3.26376
Hong Ma, T. Slater
Supported by artificial intelligence (AI), the most advanced Automatic Writing Evaluation (AWE) systems have gained increasing attention for their ability to provide immediate scoring and formative feedback, yet teachers have been hesitant to implement them into their classes because correlations between the grades they assign and the AWE scores have generally been low. This begs the question of where improvements in evaluation may need to be made, and what approaches are available to carry out this improvement. This mixed-method study involved 59 cause and effect essays collected from English language learners enrolled in six different sections of a college level academic writing course and utilized theory proposed by Slater and Mohan (2010) regarding the developmental path of cause. The study compared the results of raters who used this developmental path with the accuracy of AWE scores produced by Criterion, an AWE tool developed by Educational Testing Service (ETS), and the grades reported by teachers. Findings suggested that if Criterion is to be used successfully in the classroom, writing teachers need to take a meaning-based approach to their assessment, which would allow them and their students to understand more fully how language constructs cause and effect. Using the developmental path of cause as an analytical framework for assessment may then help teachers assign grades that are more in sync with AWE scores, which in turn can help students gain more trust in the scores they receive from both their teachers and Criterion.
{"title":"Using the Developmental Path of Cause to Bridge the Gap between AWE Scores and Writing Teachers’ Evaluations","authors":"Hong Ma, T. Slater","doi":"10.1558/WAP.V7I2-3.26376","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1558/WAP.V7I2-3.26376","url":null,"abstract":"Supported by artificial intelligence (AI), the most advanced Automatic Writing Evaluation (AWE) systems have gained increasing attention for their ability to provide immediate scoring and formative feedback, yet teachers have been hesitant to implement them into their classes because correlations between the grades they assign and the AWE scores have generally been low. This begs the question of where improvements in evaluation may need to be made, and what approaches are available to carry out this improvement. This mixed-method study involved 59 cause and effect essays collected from English language learners enrolled in six different sections of a college level academic writing course and utilized theory proposed by Slater and Mohan (2010) regarding the developmental path of cause. The study compared the results of raters who used this developmental path with the accuracy of AWE scores produced by Criterion, an AWE tool developed by Educational Testing Service (ETS), and the grades reported by teachers. Findings suggested that if Criterion is to be used successfully in the classroom, writing teachers need to take a meaning-based approach to their assessment, which would allow them and their students to understand more fully how language constructs cause and effect. Using the developmental path of cause as an analytical framework for assessment may then help teachers assign grades that are more in sync with AWE scores, which in turn can help students gain more trust in the scores they receive from both their teachers and Criterion.","PeriodicalId":42573,"journal":{"name":"Writing & Pedagogy","volume":"20 1","pages":"395-422"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2015-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78064001","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：