Xiangmin Zeng , Jie Liu , Neil Evan Jon Anthony Bowen
{"title":"中国英语专业本科生定时与非定时议论文写作中语音的比较研究","authors":"Xiangmin Zeng , Jie Liu , Neil Evan Jon Anthony Bowen","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2024.100896","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>As a somewhat elusive and occlusive concept, voice can be a challenging and formidable hurdle for second language (L2) writers. One area that exemplifies this struggle is timed argument writing, where authors must position claims, ideas, and individual perspectives to an existing knowledge base and scholarly community under the confines of time. To enrich our understandings of voice construction in L2 English writers’ timed writing, we explored how 41 Chinese English-major undergraduates deployed authorial voice in two prompt-based argument writing tasks (timed versus untimed). We also sampled their self-reported knowledge, use, and understanding of voice through a survey-based instrument. To compare the quantity and quality of voice construction between the two samples, we measured 10 voice categories, three voice dimensions, and overall voice strength. Results showed that only two categories displayed statistically significant differences in terms of frequencies, but all three voice dimensions and overall voice strength scored significantly higher in untimed writing samples. Based on the results of our text analysis and survey, we further highlight the complexities of voice in L2 writing, provide evidence in support of existing voice rubrics, and make practical suggestions for teaching and assessing voice in writing.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"62 ","pages":"Article 100896"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparative study of voice in Chinese English-major undergraduates’ timed and untimed argument writing\",\"authors\":\"Xiangmin Zeng , Jie Liu , Neil Evan Jon Anthony Bowen\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.asw.2024.100896\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>As a somewhat elusive and occlusive concept, voice can be a challenging and formidable hurdle for second language (L2) writers. One area that exemplifies this struggle is timed argument writing, where authors must position claims, ideas, and individual perspectives to an existing knowledge base and scholarly community under the confines of time. To enrich our understandings of voice construction in L2 English writers’ timed writing, we explored how 41 Chinese English-major undergraduates deployed authorial voice in two prompt-based argument writing tasks (timed versus untimed). We also sampled their self-reported knowledge, use, and understanding of voice through a survey-based instrument. To compare the quantity and quality of voice construction between the two samples, we measured 10 voice categories, three voice dimensions, and overall voice strength. Results showed that only two categories displayed statistically significant differences in terms of frequencies, but all three voice dimensions and overall voice strength scored significantly higher in untimed writing samples. Based on the results of our text analysis and survey, we further highlight the complexities of voice in L2 writing, provide evidence in support of existing voice rubrics, and make practical suggestions for teaching and assessing voice in writing.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46865,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Assessing Writing\",\"volume\":\"62 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100896\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Assessing Writing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1075293524000898\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Assessing Writing","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1075293524000898","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
A comparative study of voice in Chinese English-major undergraduates’ timed and untimed argument writing
As a somewhat elusive and occlusive concept, voice can be a challenging and formidable hurdle for second language (L2) writers. One area that exemplifies this struggle is timed argument writing, where authors must position claims, ideas, and individual perspectives to an existing knowledge base and scholarly community under the confines of time. To enrich our understandings of voice construction in L2 English writers’ timed writing, we explored how 41 Chinese English-major undergraduates deployed authorial voice in two prompt-based argument writing tasks (timed versus untimed). We also sampled their self-reported knowledge, use, and understanding of voice through a survey-based instrument. To compare the quantity and quality of voice construction between the two samples, we measured 10 voice categories, three voice dimensions, and overall voice strength. Results showed that only two categories displayed statistically significant differences in terms of frequencies, but all three voice dimensions and overall voice strength scored significantly higher in untimed writing samples. Based on the results of our text analysis and survey, we further highlight the complexities of voice in L2 writing, provide evidence in support of existing voice rubrics, and make practical suggestions for teaching and assessing voice in writing.
期刊介绍:
Assessing Writing is a refereed international journal providing a forum for ideas, research and practice on the assessment of written language. Assessing Writing publishes articles, book reviews, conference reports, and academic exchanges concerning writing assessments of all kinds, including traditional (direct and standardised forms of) testing of writing, alternative performance assessments (such as portfolios), workplace sampling and classroom assessment. The journal focuses on all stages of the writing assessment process, including needs evaluation, assessment creation, implementation, and validation, and test development.