Teaching and researching L2 writing: Exploring academic identities as teachers and researchers in a Spanish university setting.

1
Teaching and researching L2 writing Exploring
academic identities as teachers and researchers
in a Spanish university setting.

• R. M. Manchón, L.Murphy, J. Roca de Larios
• Universidad de Murcia

2
University research assessment system

• Research track system
• Individual res. output assessed every six years
• Institutional research assessment (quality
  assessment)
• Research groups
• Head researcher (IP) researchers
• University based.
• Research output publications publicly financed
  research projects (convocatorias competitivas).
• Research projects
• National level (IDI)
• Regional level
• Other banks, university,etc.

3
The research programme

• The dynamics of the L2 learners writing beliefs
  and strategies.
• Relationship between writing beliefs and writing
  strategy implementation
• 4th year group
• Any changes in the students beliefs system and
  in their L2 composing strategy deployment after
  completing an EAP course?

4
Planning and implementation of the research

• Methodological/Ethical decisions taken to keep
  the teachers/researchers roles separate
• Findings
• Outsider perspective writing as situated
  practice
• Influence of insights for our pedagogical-decision
  making.

5
The research Rationale

• Dynamic character of a persons belief system
  (Schommer, 1994a, 1994b Hofer and Pintrich,
  2002).
• Educational experiences impact beliefs and
  strategy use (Mori, 1999a, b Sakui and Gaies,
  1999 Gan, 2004 Chamot, 2005).
• Post-process movement in writing research (cf.
  Atkinson, 2003) shaping of beliefs and the
  implementation of strategic behaviour as a
  function of participating in a given culture of
  practice (Elbaum, Berg and Dodd, 1993).

6
The study Research questions

• Is there any significant difference in the
  writing beliefs about L2 writing held by Spanish
  university students after a period of instruction
  aimed at helping them to become more able L2
  writers?
• Is there any significant difference in the
  self-reported L2 writing strategies used by
  Spanish university students after a period of
  instruction aimed at helping them to become more
  able L2 writers?

7
Participants The students.

N Age (M) Years of L2 study Previous L2 university instruction Previous WR instruct. Stay abroad
15 22 12.4 3 compul. annual courses in English Writing course (9) 4.7 months
8
Participants The teacher

• 25 years experience of EFL teaching
• Native speaker of English
• 4 years of experience in teaching the EAP course
  
• Professional training and expertise
• A degree in French
• An MA in Applied Linguistics
• Lecturing on SLA and L2 teaching methodology
• 10 years of involvement in research projects on
  L2 writing.

9
Method The EAP course

• Main aim help students develop more advanced and
  integrated academic reading and writing skills.
• Contact hours 3 hrs. x 30 weeks.
• Scaffolding
• Making students aware of the different dimensions
  of the process of text construction
• Modelling and practising the use of different
  writing strategies
• Analytic reading of academic texts
• Receiving and providing feedback

10
The EAP Course texts

• Journals (fluency)
• Assignments (3 drafts peer response)
• Personal statement for a postgraduate course in
  UK
• A report of a survey carried out by them on a
  topic of their choice
• A synthesis of several texts on the topic of
  education or gender
• EXAM an argumentative essay

11
Method Chronology of the research and data
sources
Time Data source
Time 1 (October 2005) Beliefs and strategy questionnaires
Time 2 (March 2006) Beliefs and strategy questionnaires Interview with teacher
Time 3 (May 2006) Students retrospective questionnaire Teachers retrospective narrative
12
Example items Beliefs Questionnaire
13
Example items Beliefs Questionnaire
14
Example items Beliefs Questionnaire
15
Examples Strategies Questionnaire
16
Questionnaires Retrospective
4. Do you feel more/less confident now about
writing in English than you did at the beginning
of our course? Please explain if any changes have
taken place and why.   9. Would you say that your
beliefs about what writing in a foreign language
entails have changed after completing this
course? If so, please try to specify what changes
have taken place.   8. Imagine that somebody
asked you What have you learned in this
course?. What would you answer?   10. Would you
say that doing this course has influenced the
manner in which you approach and complete writing
tasks? If so, what changes, do you think, have
taken place? Please specify.
17
Method the questionnaires

• Cost-benefit considerations
• General requirements length, instructions to
  respondents nature and wording of questionnaire
  items (Bryman, 2001 Dörnyei, 2003 Oppenheim,
  1992 Peterson, 2000).

18
Methodology Keeping separate the roles of
teacher and researchers

• Design of the questionnaires teacher only looks
  at the final text
• Administration teacher participates
• Data analysis teacher only involved in
  mechanical parts (introducing data in computer
  programmes)
• Teacher asked to write retrospective narrative
• Teacher gets involved in the data analysis once
  retrospective narrative is completed and students
  answer final retrospective questionnaire

19
Insiders view

• Method non-invasive (always uncomfortable having
  work evaluated in some way)
• Unsure what was being looked at so couldnt fit
  work to research
• Just got on with course as usual
• Interviewed by an old student. Comfortable
• Asked to write narrative. Just wrote about what
  seemed important to my course

20
Results Outsider perspective. Writing as
situated practice
21
Results Changes in beliefs

1. Self-efficacy beliefs
2. Beliefs about the nature of writing
3. Beliefs about the teacher

22
Results Changes in beliefs

• Self-efficacy beliefs
• The student writers finished their literacy
  experience with increased confidence in their
  ability to write complex academic texts
• Item 1 I will learn to write complex academic
  texts this year
• M Time 14/Time 2 4.33
• SD T1.534/T2 .617
• p0.05.

23
Results Changes in beliefs

• Beliefs about the nature of writing
• Assumptions writing entails posing oneself
  problems at different levels of sophistication,
  including ideational, textual and audience
  concerns.
• The EAP exerted a statistically significant
  influence in reinforcing the students perception
  of the problem-solving nature of composing (T1
  M 3.2 SD 1.082 T2 M 3.73 SD 1.032
  plt0.02).
• Writing in English means finding ways to solve a
  great variety of problems (66.7 agreement or
  strong agreement at Time 1 and 86.7 at Time 2)

24
Results Changes in beliefs

• Retrospective questionnaire
• Writing is more complex than it may seem at first
  sight (B9)
• Writing in English is a problem-solving task
  (G15).
• I thought that writing was easier than it is
  actually (D10)
• Writing in English is a task which can take much
  time (3)
• Writing in English is not easy as I believed it
  was (C15)

25
Results Changes in beliefs

• Beliefs about their teachers
• Perceptions of the teachers response to their
  writing (My teachers pay more attention to how I
  write than to what I write M T13.46/T22.8
  SD T11.060/ T21.082 p 0.03).
• But the way this course is designed now, I have
  all these different pieces of work about
  different things that interest different people.
  I find it quite fascinating. Its quite
  interesting for me, as a teacher, to be reading
  this work and responding to it, not only as a
  writing teacher but also as an interested reader.

26
Results Changes in beliefs

• Beliefs about their teachers
• Correction (Time 1) gt Feedback (Time 2 )
• Teacher somebody mainly helping them with their
  texts (text-type conventions structuring of
  ideas. Time 1) gt Teachers role as also
  including help with the actual process of
  composing (Time 2)

27
Results Changes in strategies

• Working cooperatively with others
• (M T12.4/T22.9 SD T11.05/1.22 p 0.01)
• Use of models
• (T113 agreement with relevant item T2 53.4)
• Revision
• Distance from the text purposeful revision
  Monitoring and evaluation metacognitive
  strategies
• More expert-like approach to revision sentence
  structure audience concerns.

28
Results Changes in strategies.

• Changes in declarative knowledge and procedural
  knowledge about strategies
• I can apply techniques and strategies that I
  didnt know before (F4)
• Now many writing strategies have been given to me
  (I4)
• We have learnt different writing techniques (I8)
  
• I have learnt to work and how approach the
  writing, several techniques and organization (H8)
  
• This course has helped me to open my eyes and
  realise that writing has its tricks (D10)
• Now Im more organised when I have to start
  writing (B10)

29
Results Changes in strategies.

• Planning strategies
• a. Produce and organise ideas more clearly and
  efficiently
• b. Look at topics from different angles
• c. Constructing an argument arguments and
  counter-arguments
• d. Audience taken into account when planning
• Idea generating techniques (M8)
• Now I am able to develop and find more ideas for
  a particular topic (I10)
• Now I tend to do brainstorming before approaching
  a task more frequently than before doing this
  course (A10)
• Now I know how to plan in writing (F4).
• (I have learned) to organise my ideas before
  writing (N8)
• Helped me to know how to organise my ideas better
  when putting them on paper (L10)

30
Changes in strategies. The retrospective
questionnaire

• Formulation strategies
• Improving the style and structure of texts
• Coping better with language problems that arise
• Developing arguments better
• I now know a lot of new techniques to improve my
  style and the structure of my texts (M4)
• We have learnt to cope with some language
  problems that usually take place (I8)
• I have learnt to use various sources, use the
  information and combine it with my opinions into
  well-presented writing (H8)

31
Results The Insider perspective

• Insights
• Confidence confirmation of positive view of
  course
• Fascination lt different viewpoint
• Questions thrown up
• E.g. Use of models
• Surprises
• Use of mother tongue gt more Res Qs
• Rereading every sentence gt more Res Qs
• Interpretations
• Rich array of knowledge to draw on

32
Conclusion Outsider perspective

• Impact that educational experiences can have in
  shaping beliefs and modifying strategic
  behaviour.
• The implementation of successful and
  context-sensitive pedagogical practices surely
  depends on the presence of certain conditions in
  the educational setting
• Importance of teachers own training
• Programme duration and inclusion of a
  metacognitive component

33
Conclusion

• If writing teachers are expected to devise and
  implement enabling and sensitive pedagogical
  practices, they need help and training in the
  first place discussions of teacher preparation
  to teach writing in FOREIGN language contexts are
  absent (Exceptions Leki, 2001 Casanave,
  Forthcoming)

34
Conclusion

• Sakui and Gaies (1999) a study of learner
  beliefs can lead to more effective instructional
  planning and implementation (p. 487).
• Question for further research how the empirical
  data collected in this and similar studies can
  lead to more enabling teaching practices in
  instructed language contexts in which teachers
  must help students to improve their capacity to
  express themselves in writing in their second
  language.

35
Conclusion The insiders perspective

• Research feeds into teaching
• Teaching feeds into research
• Importance of team trust, joint knowledge.
  Separate insider/outsider roles.
• Different viewpoint helps to link to other
  research, see where it fits in broader picture.
• Complexity of teaching, human interaction.
• Reality of teaching messy outside view of
  research clean

36

• THANK YOU
• GRACIAS