Assessing academic writing: L1 English content professors’ accommodation to non-standard rhetorical organization in L2 student writing.
Masters thesis, Concordia University.
- Accepted Version
Assessing academic writing: L1 English content professors’ accommodation to non-standard rhetorical organization in L2 student writing
It is estimated that second language (L2) speakers of English in the world now outnumber first language (L1) English speakers more than 3 to 1. This shift in balance necessitates a re-examination of the notion of Standard English as L2 speakers develop regional and functional variations of English. In academic writing, Standard English is based not just on discrete elements of the language, but also on culturally determined rhetorical organization, which L2 scholars are expected to master to succeed in academia. Research suggests that in English academic publishing, the insistence on this culturally-defined rhetorical organization results in the unintentional silencing of the voices of L2 scholars. Yet whether the same insistence exists for university class assignments has been under investigated. Studies on the differences in the rhetorical organization of student-written compositions in languages other than English have not considered reader response. Conversely, studies exploring reader response to L2 writing have focussed on sentence-level errors rather than on rhetorical organization.
Using think-aloud protocols to access the thought processes of L1 content professors as they assess L2 student writing presented in both standard and non-standard rhetorical organization, this study employs a framework of critical discourse analysis to investigate whether L1 professors at a large Canadian university with a significant international student body accommodate to non-standard rhetorical organization in L2 student writing.
|Divisions:||Concordia University > Faculty of Arts and Science > Education|
|Item Type:||Thesis (Masters)|
|Date:||12 August 2011|
|Thesis Supervisor(s):||White, Joanna|
|Keywords:||assessment, accommodation, L2 academic writing, think-aloud protocols|
MARGARET H LEVEY
|Deposited On:||17 Nov 2011 20:32|
|Last Modified:||05 Nov 2016 01:41|
Ammon, U. (2006). Language planning for international scientific communication: an overview of questions and potential solutions. Current Issues in Language Planning, 7(1), 1-30.
Arndt, V. (1987). Six writers in search of texts: A protocol-based study of L1 and L2 writing. ELT Journal 41(4), 257-267.
Belcher, D. (2007). Seeking acceptance in an English-only research world. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16, 1-22.
Bloor, M., & Bloor, T. (2007). The practice of critical discourse analysis: an introduction. London: Hodder Headline.
Boggs, C., & Giles, H. (1999). “The canary in the coalmine”: The non-accommodation cycle in the gendered workplace. International journal of applied linguistics, 9(2), 223-245.
Bohman, J. (2008). Critical Theory. In E.N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition). Retrieved December 3, 2008 from <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/critical-theory/>.
Berns, M. (2005). Expanding on the expanding circle: where do we go from here? World Englishes, 24(1), 85-93.
Canagarajah, S. (2002). A geopolitics of academic writing. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Canagarajah, S. (2006). An interview with Suresh Canagarajah. [With R. Rubdy and M.Saraceni.] In R. Rubdy and M. Saraceni (Eds.) English in the world: Global rules, global roles (pp. 200-211). London: Continuum.
Chew, P. G-L. (2010). From chaos to order: Language change, lingua francas and world Englishes. In M. Saxena & T. Omoniyi (Eds.), Contending with globalization in world Englishes (pp. 45-71). Bristol, Buffalo and Toronto: Multilingual Matters.
Chilton, P. (2005). Missing links in mainstream CDA: modules, blends, and the critical instinct. In R. Wodak & P. Chilton (Eds.). A new agenda in (critical) discourse analysis (pp.19-52). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Connor, U. (1996). Contrastive rhetoric: cross-cultural aspects of second-language writing. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
Crystal, D. (2003). English as a global language. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Cumming, A., Kantor, R., & Powers, D. E. (2002). Decision making while rating ESL/EFL writing tasks: A descriptive framework. The Modern Languages Journal 86, i, 67-96.
Cushing-Weigle, S. (2002). Assessing writing. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
De Beaugrande, R. (1997). Text Linguistics, Discourse Analysis, and the Discourse of Dictionaries. In A. Hermans (Ed.), Les dictionnaires specialisés et l’analyse de la valeur (pp.57-74). Louvain-la-Neuve: Peeters,
Dewey, M., & Jenkins, J. (2010). English as a lingua franca in the global context: Interconnectedness, variation and change. In M. Saxena & T. Omoniyi (Eds.), Contending with globalization in world Englishes (pp. 72-92). Bristol, Buffalo and Toronto: Multilingual Matters.
Enqvist, N.E. (1987). Text linguistics for the applier: and orientation. In U. Connor & R. B. Kaplan (Eds.), Writing across languages: analysis of L2 text (pp. 23-43). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1980). Verbal reports as data. Psychological Review, 87(3), 215-251.
Fairclough, N. L. (1985). Critical and descriptive goals in discourse analysis. Journal of Pragmatics, 9, 739-763.
Flowerdew, J.(2001). Attitudes of journal editors to nonnative speaker contributions. TESOL Quarterly, 35(1), 121-150.
Flowerdew, J. (2007). The non-Anglophone scholar on the periphery of scholarly publication. AILA Review, 20, 15-27.
Flowerdew, J. (2008). Scholarly writers who use English as an additional language: what can Goffman’s “Stigma” tell us? Journal of English for Academic Purposes 7, 77-86.
García Landa, LG. (2006). Academic language barriers and language freedom. Current Issues in Language Planning, 7(1), 61-81.
Geisler, C. (1994). Academic literacy and the nature of expertise: reading, writing, and knowing in academic philosophy. Hillsdale, NJ and Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Gonzalez, V., Chen, C-Y., & Sanchez, C. (2001). Cultural thinking and discourse organizational patterns influencing writing skills in a Chinese English-as-a-foreign language (EFL) learner. Bilingual Research Journal (Fall 2001edition). Retrieved December 3, 2008 from <http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3722/is_200110/ai_n8984150/>.
Grabe, W., & Kaplan, R. B. (1989). Writing in a second language: contrastive rhetoric. In D.M. Johsnon & D.H. Roen (Eds.), Richness in writing: empowering ESL students (pp. 263-283). New York and London: Longman.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976) Cohesion in English. London, UK: Longman.
Hamp-Lyons, L. (1991). Scoring procedures for ESL contexts. In L. Hamp-Lyons (Ed.), Assessing second language writing in academic contexts (pp. 241-276). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Hinds, J. (1983). Contrastive rhetoric: Japanese and English. Text, 3(2), 183-195.
Hinds, J. (1987). Reader versus writer responsibility: a new typology. In U. Connor & R. B. Kaplan (Eds.), Writing across languages: analysis of L2 text (pp. 141-152). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Homburg, T.J (1984). Holistic evaluation of ESL compositions: Can it be validated objectively? TESOL Quarterly 18(1), 87-107.
Jenkins, J. (2009). English as a lingua franca: Interpretations and attitudes. World Englishes, 28(2), 200-207.
Jenkins, J. (2010). ELF still at the gate: Attitudes towards English as a lingua franca. Linguistic Insights - Studies in Language and Communication, 94, 101-113. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/875714082?accountid=10246
Jenkins, J. (2011). Accommodating (to) ELF in the international university. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(4), 926-936. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/875713505?accountid=10246
Kachru, B.B. (1985). Standards, codification and sociolinguistic realism: The English language in the outer circle. In R. Quirk and H. Widdowson (Eds.), English in the world: Teaching and learning the language and literatures (pp. 11-36). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kachru, B. (1992). Teaching world Englishes. In B. Kachru (Ed.), The other tongue: English across cultures. (pp. 355-365). Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
Kachru, Y. (1992). Culture, style, and discourse: expanding noetics of English. In B. Kachru (Ed.), The other tongue: English across cultures. (pp. 341-352). Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
Kachru, Y. (2009). Academic writing in world Englishes: The Asian context. In K. Murato & J. Jenkins (Eds.), Global Englishes in Asian contexts (pp. 111-130). Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Kachru,Y., & Smith, L.E. (2008). Cultures, contexts, and world Englishes. New York and London: Routledge.
Kaplan, R. B. (1966), Cultural thought patterns in inter-cultural education. Language Learning, 16(1-2),1–20. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-1770.1966.tb00804.x
Kaplan, R. B. (1989). On written text. Anglo-American Studies IX(2), 117-127.
Kaplan, R. B., & Grabe, W. (2002). A modern history of written discourse analysis. Journal of Second Language Writing 11, 191-223.
Kobayashi, H., & Rinnert, C. (1996). Factors affecting composition evaluation in an EFL context: Cultural rhetorical pattern and readers’ background. Language Learning 46(3), 397-437.
Kumaravadivelu, B.K. (2006). Understanding language teaching: from method to postmethod. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Luke, A. (1997). Theory and practice in critical science discourse. In L. Saha (Ed.), International encyclopedia of the sociology of education. Retrieved December 1, 2008 from http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/courses/ed253a/Luke/SAHA6.html
Luke, A. (2002). Beyond science and ideology critique: developments in critical discourse analysis. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 96-110.
Luke, A. (2004). Notes on the future of critical discourse analysis. Critical Discourse Studies, 1(1), 149-157.
Mackey, A., & Gass, S.M. (2005). Second language research: methodology and design. Mahwah & London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Mendelsohn, D., & Cumming, A. (1987). Professors’ ratings of language use and rhetorical organizations in ESL compositions. TESL Canada Journal 5(1), 9-26.
Mohan, B. A., & Lo, W. A. (1985). Academic writing and chinese students: Transfer and developmental factors. TESOL Quarterly, 19(3), 515-515-534. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/58123674?accountid=10246
Olson, D.R. (2000). From utterance to text: the bias of language in speech and writing. In P.K. Smith & A. D. Pellegrini (Eds.), Psychology of education: major themes, volume iii (pp.3-30). New York, NY: Routledge.
Ozturk, I. (2007) The textual organisation of research article introductions in applied linguistics: Variability within a single discipline. English for Specific Purposes, 26, 25-38.
Ramberg, B., & Gjesdal, K. (2008). Hermeneutics. In E.N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition). Retrieved December 3, 2008 from <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/hermeneutics/>.
Roberts, F., & Cimasko, T. (2008). Evaluating ESL: Making sense of university professors’ responses to second language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 17, 125-143.
Samraj, B. (2002). Introductions in research articles: variations across disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 21, 1-17.
Santos, T. (1988). Professors’ reactions to the academic writing of nonnative-speaking students. TESOL Quarterly 22(1), 69-90.
Saxena, M., & Omoniyi, T. (2010). Final reflections. In M. Saxena & T. Omoniyi (Eds.), Contending with globalization in world Englishes (211-229). Bristol, Buffalo and Toronto: Multilingual Matters.
Seidlhofer, B. (2004). Research perspectives on teaching English as a lingua franca. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 209-209-239. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/85671035?accountid=10246
Shen, F. (1989). The Classroom and the Wider Culture: Identity as a Key to Learning English Composition. College Composition and Communication 40(4), 459-466.
Shi, L., & Kubota, R. (2007). Patterns of rhetorical organization in Canadian and American language arts textbooks: An exploratory study. English for Specific Purposes, 26, 180-202.
Silver, D. (2005). Doing qualitative research. London: Sage Publications.
Song, B. & Caruso, I. (1996). Do English and ESL faculty differ in evaluating the essays of native English-speaking and ESL Students? Journal of Second Language Writing 5(2), 163-182.
Swales, J.M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Sweedler-Brown, C.O. (1993). The effects of ESL errors on holistic scores assigned by English composition faculty. College ESL 3(1), 53-69.
Tomiyana, M. (1980). Grammatical errors and communication breakdown. TESOL Quarterly 14(1), 71-79.
Van Dijk, T.A.(1993). Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse & Society, 4(2), 249-283.
Van Dijk (1994). Academic nationalism. Discourse & Society 5(3), 275-276.
Van Dijk (2005). Contextual knowledge management in discourse production: a CDA perspective. In R. Wodak & P. Chilton (Eds.). A new agenda in (critical) discourse analysis (pp.71-1000). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Vann, R. J., Meyer, D.E. & Lorenz, F.O. (1984). Error gravity: A study of faculty opinions of ESL errors. TESOL Quarterly 18(3), 427-440.
Vaughn, C. (1991). Holistic assessment: What goes on in the raters’ minds? In L. Hamp-Lyons (Ed.), Assessing second language writing in academic contexts (pp. 111-126). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Vavrus, F. K. (1991). When paradigms clash: the role of institutionalized varieties in language teacher education. World Englishes 10(2), 181-195.
Weir, C. J. (1988). Communicative language testing with special reference to English as a foreign language. Exeter: University of Exeter Press.
Wodak, R (1999). Critical discourse analysis at the end of the 20th century. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 32(1&2), 185-193.
Wodak, R. (2001). What CDA is about. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis (pp. 1-13). London: Routledge.
Wodak, R., & Chilton, P. (Eds.) 2005. A new agenda in (critical) discourse analysis. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Wolfe, E., Kao, C., & Ranney, M. (1998). Cognitive differences in proficient and nonproficient essay scorers. Written Communication 15, 465-492.
All items in Spectrum are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved. The use of items is governed by Spectrum's terms of access
Repository Staff Only: item control page