Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBekar, Mira
dc.date.accessioned2015-12-17T10:52:24Z
dc.date.available2015-12-17T10:52:24Z
dc.date.issued2011
dc.identifier.citationM. Bekar, Self-reported problems of L1 and L2 college writers: what can writing instructors do?, [in:] FLOW. Foreign Language Opportunities in Writing, eds. J. Majer, Ł. Salski, Łódź University Press, Łódź 2011, p. 97–123.pl_PL
dc.identifier.isbn978-83-7525-564-5
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11089/15701
dc.description.abstractUnderstanding self-reported problems of L1 and L2 writers regarding the writing process holds important pedagogical implications for instructors to address their students’ specific writing needs. L2 writers were usually reported to have more difficulty setting goals and generating material, and to produce less accurate and effective texts (Leki, 1992; Silva 1993, 1997). This paper compares the self-reported writing difficulties of two groups: L1 (N=19) and L2 (N=19) freshman composition students from an American university. To analyze the group differences, a questionnaire (using 5-point Likert scale) about the perceptions of writing difficulties and approaches to writing process was used. Findings from the descriptive statistical analysis suggest that despite self-reported common problems, such as keeping clarity by using appropriate syntax, the L1 and L2 students presented different views on the importance of visuals in a text. While L1s find visuals to be least important for the reader to understand the text, L2s find visuals to be most important. The results reveal that although instructors focus on teaching essay organization, both L1 and L2 students need more instruction on creating better sentence structures. Encouraging L2 students to use visuals (pictures and graphs) in their persuasive essays would prove beneficial for them to overcome writing problems in English.pl_PL
dc.language.isoenpl_PL
dc.publisherWydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiegopl_PL
dc.relation.ispartof“FLOW. Foreign Language Opportunities in Writing”, eds. J. Majer, Ł. Salski, Łódź University Press, Łódź 2011;
dc.titleSelf-reported problems of L1 and L2 college writers: what can writing instructors do?pl_PL
dc.typeBook chapterpl_PL
dc.rights.holder© Copyright by Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego, Łódź 2011pl_PL
dc.page.number[97]-123pl_PL
dc.contributor.authorAffiliationPurdue University.pl_PL
dc.contributor.authorBiographicalnoteMira Bekar is a third-year PhD student in the Second Language Studies program at Purdue University, USA. She earned her BA in English Language and Literature and her MPhil (Linguistics) from Sts Cyril and Methodius University, Macedonia. She has been teaching speaking, reading, grammar and writing in English courses for 9 years now. She is employed at Sts Cyril and Methodius University as a senior language instructor. She published few articles in Macedonian covering topics on second language writing curricula design and language attitudes. Her research interests vary from discourse analysis and second language writing to exploring the relationship between language and social interaction.pl_PL
dc.referencesAmerican University Career Center. 2007. Available at http://www.american.edu/careercenter/employers/internationalstudents.html Accessed on 28 September 2010.pl_PL
dc.referencesBickner, J. R. and P. Peyasantiwong. 1988. “Cultural Variations in Reflective Writing. Writing Across Languages and Cultures: Issues in Contrastive Rhetoric”, edited by A.C. Purves. 160-176. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.pl_PL
dc.referencesBullock, R. 2006. The Norton Field Guide to Writing. New York: W.W. Norton and Company.pl_PL
dc.referencesChoi, J. 2005. “A Contrastive Analysis of Argumentative Essays Written in English by Korean ESL students and by Native English-Speaking Students.” Unpublished Dissertation, Southern Illinois University Carbondale, US.pl_PL
dc.referencesConnor, U. 1984. “A study of cohesion and coherence in English as a second language students writing.” Papers in Linguistics, 17(1-4). 301-316.pl_PL
dc.referencesConnor, U. 1996. Contrastive Rhetoric: Cross-cultural aspects of Second-language Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesConnor, U. and R. Kaplan. (eds.). 1987. Writing across languages: Analysis of L2 text Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.pl_PL
dc.referencesConnor, U., and K. Asenavange. 1994. “Peer response groups in ESL writing classes: How much impact on revision?” Journal of Second Language Writing, 3(3). 256-276.pl_PL
dc.referencesFerris, D. 1994. “Lexical and Syntactic Features of ESL Writing by Students at Different Levels of L2 Proficiency.” TESOL Quarterly, 28(2). 414-420.pl_PL
dc.referencesHomstad, T. and H. Thorson. 2000. “Writing and foreign language pedagogy: Theories and implications.” In Brauer, G. (ed.), Writing across languages. 3-14.pl_PL
dc.referencesHyland, K. 2003. Second language writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesKaplan, R. B. 1966. Cultural thought patterns in inter-cultural education. Language Learning, 16(1). 1-20.pl_PL
dc.referencesKaplan, R. B., and W. Grabe. 2002. “A modern history of written discourse analysis.” Journal of Second Language Writing, 11. 191-223.pl_PL
dc.referencesKrapels, A. 1990. “The interaction of first and second language composing: Processes and rhetorics.” Dissertation Abstracts International, 51(12), 4045A.pl_PL
dc.referencesLeki, I. 1992. Understanding ESL writers: A guide for teachers. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.pl_PL
dc.referencesMahmoud, A. 1982. “A functional analysis of written composition of Egyptian students of English and the implications of the notional functional syllabus for the teaching of writing.” Dissertation Abstracts International, 44(5), 1439A.pl_PL
dc.referencesMatsuda, P. K., and K. E. De Pew. 2002. “Early second language writing: An introduction.” Journal of Second Language Writing, 11. 261-268.pl_PL
dc.referencesMonassar, H. 2005.” Cohesion and coherence: Contrastive transitions in the EFL/ESL writing of university Arab students.” Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ball State University, US.pl_PL
dc.referencesOstler, S. 1980.” English in parallels: A study of Arabic style.” Manuscript, University of Southern California.pl_PL
dc.referencesOstler, S. 1987. “English in parallels: A comparison of English and Arabic prose.” In U. Connor and R. Kaplan. (eds.). Writing across languages: Analysis of L2 text. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.pl_PL
dc.referencesReichelt, M. 1999. “Toward a more comprehensive view of L2 writing: Foreign language writing in the U.S.” Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(2). 181-20.pl_PL
dc.referencesReid, J. M. 1988. “Quantitative differences in English prose written by Arabic, Chinese,Spanish, and English students.” Dissertation Abstract International, 50(3). 672.pl_PL
dc.referencesScarcella, R. 1984. “How writers orient their readers in expository essays: A comparative study of native and non-native English writers.” TESOL Quarterly, 18. 671-688.pl_PL
dc.referencesSilva, T. 1990. “Second language composition instruction: Developments, issues and directions in ESL.” In Kroll, B. (ed.), Second Language Writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 11-23), New York: CUP.pl_PL
dc.referencesSilva, T. 1993. “Toward an understanding of the distinct nature of L2 writing: The ESLresearch and its implications.” TESOL Quarterly, 27. 665-77.pl_PL
dc.referencesSilva, T., Leki, I., and J. Carson. 1997. Broadening the perspective of mainstreamcomposition studies: Some thought from the disciplinary margins. WrittenCommunication, 14. 398-428.pl_PL
dc.referencesUysal, H. H. 2008. “Tracing the culture behind writing: Rhetorical patterns andbidirectional transfer in L1 and L2 essays of Turkish writers in relation to educational context.” Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(3). 183-207.pl_PL


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record