Multi-draft composing: An iterative model for academic argument writing (original) (raw)
Related papers
PYRAMID OF ARGUMENTATION: TOWARDS AN INTEGRATED MODEL FOR TEACHING AND ASSESSING ESL WRITING
JOURNAL OF LANGUAGE AND COMMUNICATION, 2018
In an argumentative piece of writing, an issue is put forth, its pros and cons are considered, and the writer‟s justification(s) for supporting one of them is presented. Although there are several models of argumentation, what is lacking in the literature is a comprehensive model for assessing writing by English as a Second Language (ESL) learners. This paper presents the Pyramid of Argumentation (PoA) that is an integrated model for assessing writing. As a three-sided pyramid standing on four columns, PoA integrates several recent and ancient theories of argumentation, linguistic competence, and language assessment. While the pyramid focuses on the components of argumentative writing, the pillars involve components of language ability and language assessment. The four sides of the pyramid, logos, ethos, rhetorical situation, as well as style and arrangement represent adapted version of the Classical Rhetoric as re-introduced by Crowley (1994) and Kinneavy (1971). The side of the pyramid that covers logos is replaced by Toulmin‟s (2003) Model of Argument. The four columns, on which the pyramid is based, include the language knowledge, context of situation, world knowledge, and strategic knowledge. PoA integrates the theory of Communicative Language Ability (Bachman, 1990) with Components of Language Competence (Bachman, 1990). Writing teachers and material developers can use the PoA to make sure that they cover all the skills that learners need to develop mature pieces of argumentative writing. With the PoA as a framework, self-assessment and peer-review checklists can be developed to scaffold students‟ learning of argumentative writing. Similarly, such a framework can provide the criteria based on which rubrics for evaluating argumentative essays can be designed. As a comprehensive model, PoA will help teachers improve validity of their assessment by providing a comprehensive account of argumentative writing construct.
Eduscience Journal
Since argumentative writing skills play an indispensable role in higher educational contexts, the students are required to produce academic works representing their academic insights and critical perspectives towards problematized issues around them. Conversely, the students may frequently encounter intricacies while applying complicated syntactic forms and proper aspects during writing Discussion essays as one of the argumentative writing genres. For this reason, the current study aimed at exploring how Talk-Write technique facilitates the students in writing Discussion essays. This study involved 30 EFL students and an experienced writing teacher at a university in Indonesia. The data were analyzed through thematic analysis following the notions of Talk-Write (Meyers, 1985; Ling, 1986; Radcliffe: Crasnich & Lumbelli, 2005). The findings indicated that Talk-Write technique enables the students to produce the Discussion essays. Besides, it stimulated them to speak actively in English while negotiating ideas, exchanging debatable arguments and positioning stance and voice. Briefly, Talk-Write technique can facilitate the students in exchanging vocal to scribal dialogue, gaining pivotal and desired ideas and fostering professional competencies as the talkers and the writers and personal styles.
Academic writing is a central component of many English language courses in Japan. However, in order to write well academically students need to know how to construct a good argument. Traditionally the field of contrastive rhetoric has suggested that students from Japanese, and other Asian, discourse communities may find themselves at a distinct disadvantage when it comes to writing in English because the rhetorical structure of their native language is so different from English. However, recent studies have shown that there are two significant problems with this view of language transfer. The first is that negative transfer between a student’s first and second language may not be as statistically significant as it was previously thought. The other is that in our global community the rhetorical structures taught to Japanese students may not, in fact, be so different from the style of deductive argumentation that is taught to students in academic writing classes in Europe and North America. In fact, studies have suggested that it is often the case that the rhetorical form of what constitutes a good essay in a Japanese university class is very similar to how professors would like their students to write in the West. This paper looks at the current state of research in comparative rhetoric with a focus on its relation to academic writing in ESL classes at Japanese universities in order to provide some background for a study that examines the similarities and differences between the structure of Language 1 (L1) and Language 2 (L2) compositions done by first year university students studying English at a Japanese university in Kyoto.
Applying rhetorical methods to teach writing techniques to pre-service teachers
International journal of education and practice, 2024
This study explores the impact of rhetorical strategies on the writing techniques of preservice teachers. It specifically examines how process-based writing instruction, rooted in Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL), enhances the ability of student teachers to employ effective writing methods in crafting argumentative essays. Utilizing a sample of 98 student teachers from Greece, the research was conducted through a performancebased essay task, supported by two think-aloud protocols. This approach allowed for a detailed examination of the writing techniques used by pre-service teachers, both before and after receiving process-based writing instruction. The study focuses on the application and improvement of writing methods through the use of a rhetorical process approach. The results highlight the significance of rhetorical strategies, such as idea generation and rewriting, in the development of effective writing skills. The study reveals a clear improvement in the ability of students to choose and integrate relevant ideas into their essays after mastering these techniques. Additionally, the findings suggest the frequent use of translation strategies from native to foreign language s in concluding an article. This research underscores the importance of teaching rhetorical strategies in pre-service teacher training programs. By focusing on these techniques, educators can better equip student teachers with the skills necessary to become proficient writers, capable of addressing various audiences effectively. The study ad vocates for a greater emphasis on process-based instruction to enhance writing competencies in educational settings. Contribution/Originality: This study contributes to the field by emphasizing the practical application of rhetorical strategies in teaching writing to pre-service teachers. Its originality lies in addressing the gap in existing methodologies and highlighting the importance of mastering rhetorical techniques in the writing process. 1. INTRODUCTION Students cannot avoid developing writing skills when studying English (Connor & Traversa, 2014; Hosseini, 2016). Connor and Traversa (2014) found writing skills to be demanding and difficult to develop since there are many factors to take into account while producing an effective essay, including syntax, semantics, and pragmatics. Because students have a limited command of English, they have trouble mastering writing skills. Khairuddin, Rahmat, Noor, and Khairuddin (2021) contend that pupils with limited English competence will struggle to write well. In terms of
Journal of Second Language Writing, 2003
This paper contends that the L2 literature yields little empirical evidence of a relationship between the features associated with L1 voice and the quality of L2 academic writing. In fact, some of these features may be of little consequence in certain L2 writing contexts. Writing samples requiring learners to argue in favor of or against an aspect of Canada’s immigration policy were elicited from 63 students in a writing-intensive first-year course. These samples were scored by (1) three raters for “voice,” using a special Voice Intensity Rating Scale with four components (assertiveness; self-identification; reiteration of central point; and authorial presence and autonomy of thought), created especially for this study, as well as (2) three raters for overall writing quality, using Jacobs et al.’s (1981) ESL Composition Profile. Interrater reliability, based on the Spearman–Brown Prophesy Formula, was found to be 0.84 for the ratings of voice intensity and 0.73 for the ratings of overall quality. Most importantly, no significant correlation was found either between overall quality and overall voice intensity or between overall quality and any of the four components of voice. The results suggest that there may not be a connection between the linguistic and rhetorical devices commonly associated with individualized voice (e.g., first person singular or intensifiers) and the quality of writing, at least within some genres and at some levels of writing proficiency.
Argument Writing in Academic Written English I
2010
This report presents the results of classroom research designed to measure whether and to what extent instruction on how to write an argument in English resulted in improved ability of university students to write such a genre. Improvement was measured through a pre-test/post-test design. Some problems with such a research design are discussed. The results show that the majority of students improved in their displayed ability to write an argument in English.
A Self-assessment Checklist for Undergraduate Students’ Argumentative Writing
Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 2014
With a growing emphasis on students' ability to assess their own written works in teaching English as a Second Language (ESL) writing courses, self-assessment checklists are today regarded as useful tools. These checklists can help learners diagnose their own weaknesses and improve their writing performance. This necessitates development of checklists that guide the learners in assessing their own writing. In this study, a self-assessment checklist was developed for undergraduate students in an ESL context to help them with their argumentative essays. This paper presents the related literature and theories, based on which the checklist was developed. The checklist is described and its potential theoretical and practical implications in ESL writing classes are discussed. Further research is necessary to refine the checklist through focus group studies with lecturers and students.
English for Specific Purposes, 2018
This paper reports on an SFL-based writing intervention in a university global histories course and examines differences in developmental trajectories among students after the intervention. Based on our previous research on writing in this course, we developed three Systemic Functional Linguistics-based workshops to explicitly teach valued linguistic resources necessary for meeting the expectations of writing historical arguments. We examine how student writing developed among nine focal students both quantitatively and qualitatively using an SFL-based rubric that we developed for the purposes of this study. We focus closely on two students, a novice and an experienced writer of academic English, by providing a detailed analysis of how they progressed differently towards incorporating the targeted linguistic resources. Our analysis suggests that explicit disciplinary writing instruction can help close the gap between novice and experienced academic writers; however, experienced writers also showed gains. Given the limited research on how intervention studies affect writing, particularly at the university level, this study can help teachers and researchers respond to the needs of the increasingly linguistically diverse students in higher education.