1/30

One thing that I’ve struggled with in helping international students is what is the students’ problem versus other peoples’ problems and the fact that I can only help the students and not their audience.  It's frustrating!  Let’s consider articles.  For many L2 English speakers articles are a perpetual stumbling block.  Research shows that native-like use of articles is one of the last features acquired if at all.  I don’t emphasize articles even in grammar classes because students just won’t get it.  I advocate for ESL grammar instructors not to take off points for article use on the final exam.  Article errors are local; they won’t interfere with the transmission of a writer’s message.  I don’t think it’s ever the goal for an L2 writer or speaker to sound like an L1 writer or speaker.  However, when I choose not to emphasize something like articles, I wonder if it does the student a disservice because some people will judge them for these insignificant errors.  I don’t think perfection should be a student’s goal, but I’m not in a position to change the mind of the judgmental people who might dismiss a writer missing a few articles.  All I can do is help prepare the writer to face all audiences, even readers and listeners who don’t have open minds and who don’t appreciate the unique creativity and playfulness in L2 language.


I’d never considered empirical studies of tutor talk before, but reading the chapter from Talk about Writing I saw a lot of strategies that I use but never really thought about.  I imagine looking at these strategies empirically might result in a more directed tutoring approach. 

Comments

  1. Tamar BernfeldJanuary 27, 2018 at 7:39 PM

    I totally agree with you Lin. It isn't the goal for L2 writers to sound like "native speakers" (and I would question what "native" is in the first place). However, I would say that we are in the position to change people's minds about accepting diverse voices in writing; the academy accepts the dollars and scholarship of these international students. I feel it is unjust for there to be pressure put upon students to have "perfect" articles, prepositions, etc (these features that adult learners will most likely never fully acquire). This pressure puts these students at a disadvantage in terms of the amount of time they have to spend/help they have to seek out to "correct" these "problems". When students come to the writing center and tell me they want to work on articles (and prepositions), I tell them that I am happy to go over the patterns (not rules ) such as known/unknown information, first mention/subsequent mention, but basically it is not worth our time to spend an entire session on something like this. I usually identify the places where articles and/or prepositions are non-standard, give suggestions if they want them, and move on to content, organization, and other work that is related to constructing meaning through writing.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Writing to Learn, Learning to Write

I'm familiar with different approaches in different contexts. As an instructor, I'm most familiar with learning to write, because even my content-based assignments receive extensive writing attention. As a student, though, I was and am more familiar with writing to learn. But I'm still displeased that as a student in English at the undergraduate, MA, and PhD levels, there was/is not more attention placed on learning to write. At this stage, this seems to be something professors take for granted. (I was recently told: "That's not how you title a dissertation chapter." And I responded: "Can you please tell me how you title a book chapter? I have never done this.") I think also in liberal arts required courses, writing to learn is prioritized in many (most?) disciplines. I'm not particularly persuaded by one form over another, though I have never succeeded in writing to learn language models. But I am partial to the idea that learning to write sho...
Read more

Emi 03/27

These two case studies consider two different research methods that will inevitably lead to very different discussions and presentation of the ideas.  T he non-fiction case study (Lorraine) is purely qualitative, while the academic case study (Fei) is a mixed methods study in which qualitative data is quantitized and the rest of the collected qualitative data (e.g. interview) mainly serves to enhance legitimation. These two different focus, qualitative (Lorraine) and Mixed methods with a focus on quantitative (Fei) are well accepted in research. However, the way that readers approach them may be very different. The qualitative (non-fiction) case study is more engaging, more relatable, and easier to read. As promoted in Qualitative research, the authors present the data as if it were a story and include very detailed anecdotes (called vignettes) that represent the main point to be conveyed. The study is not replicable, but the authors do provide additional information to ensure...
Read more

4/17

In my tutoring sessions, I've been most familiar with the 'learning to write' paradigm. I felt Ortega's statement that "...LW places at the center of attention the cognitive activity of the writer and her or his authorial voice" encapsulates the work my students have called on me to do. Whether they're working on a Peace Corps application, a psychology paper, a global health paper or a speech for Rhetoric, I've found my work can be described in Ortega's twofold statement: helping students put in writing first, their cognitive activity (their opinions, arguments, and questions) and second, their authorial voice (by airing confusions, doubts, and identifying needs for further research). In class, I'm wondering if we can have a discussion about the overlap between LW and WLL when it comes to students picking up specific language necessary for academic assignments. As Ortega writes, there is a difference between students "learning to write abo...
Read more