2/20


I don’t think there’s any real way to separate Higher Order concerns and Lower Order concerns. The example of the French tutor using word choice (transitions) to establish the relationships between ideas shows this-they are often connected.  If grammar errors hinder meaning, can they be considered local?  If a student cannot express a thought because they lack a necessary grammatical structure, then focusing on the organization of the text isn’t helping anyone. Non-native speakers care about grammar and vocabulary, and I think they’d feel dissatisfied if we ignored that, but there’s no reason not to focus on both.  I’m not sure that the distinction between FL and L2 learners is particularly useful either, though there would definitely be different strategies based on the level of a student. I also don’t like the dismissal of “L1 interference.”  It’s L1 transfer if some feature of a student’s fist language helps in their L2; it’s interference by definition if it hinders them. 

I tried the technique of restating a student’s ideas.  For my domestic undergrads, they always agreed with my summary.  I had a more perplexing time with a graduate student.  In the discussion section of a double-blind placebo controlled experiment on the effect of GSPE  on mild cognitive impairment, she’d written something like, “The cause may have been that participants took the same test pre-and post treatment and may have learned from taking it the first time.”  I couldn’t tell if “cause” meant the cause of other experiments that showed that GSPE worked, or their own experiment in which both the control group and the test group showed improvement.  I asked her if it was the former, and she said yes.  Just to be certain, I tried the other way and she agreed that’s what she meant.  I asked her to explain exactly what she meant, and she explained about the participants taking the same MCI test, but I couldn’t get her to tell me which “cause” she was talking about.  Eventually she circled it and said she’d rewrite it, but I’m still not sure we ever solved the problem.

I think there is a definite benefit to acknowledging and trying to understand that there are many writing styles and traditions that differ from accepted academic norms, just as non-standard varieties of language are crucially NOT sub-standard. This will likely help the student feel that their writing is valued, and helps the tutor see value and sophistication they might otherwise overlook. I’m a little uncomfortable making assumptions about a student based on their culture, but perhaps recognizing patterns could be helpful.  I also wonder if suggesting students learn about differences to expect from various other cultures might set up some sort of “us” vs “them” dichotomy that would make the students from different traditions feel like outsiders.  One writing pattern that I’ve noticed from my Chinese undergrad students is a reliance on formulaic phrases, a result of TOEFL preparation.  The “In today’s society,” “With the development of technology,” etc.  This might be a characteristic of the writing of a particular group of my students coming out of a particular culture, but I don’t really negotiate much.  Perhaps I should.  

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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

post 2/27

I found strategies like Show that All Texts Reflect the Author's Frame of Reference and Thus are Subject to Interrogation and Analysis  and Writing 'Translations' particularly helpful for my students who struggle to delineate form from content in their assigned readings. They carry this confusion into their writing by either making clear arguments without providing adequate context, or mimicking the convoluted syntax of academic writing instead of articulating in terms clearest to them what they mean. One question I have is, what are some resources we can point students to help them parse through academic jargon (especially when their instructors have not provided them this resource/ training in class)? Are there existing "Reading guides" online like those described on p.141?
Read more

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