Transcript Document

“Think in my mind and write from my heart”:
Exploring student-centered college English writing pedagogy
“写我所思记我所感”—以学生为主体的大学英语写作教学实践探索
吉林大学
战菊 张凤娟 潘海英
[email protected]
1
Outline









Background
Purpose of the study
Theoretical basis
Issues being addressed
Course design
Findings and course features
Discussion
Conclusion
References
2
Background
 EFL teaching reform based on the College English
Curriculum Requirements (2004, 2007)
 College English courses: twice a week; 90 minutes each
time
 Writing is marginalized. Few writing courses available.
 Students experience difficulties in learning to write in
English.
 Their performance in the writing section of high-stakes
English tests (e.g., CET 4/6) is far from being satisfactory.
3
Background
 Role of writing instruction
- Improve writing skills
- Enhance thinking capacity, including critical thinking
ability
- Contribute to overall language development by enhancing
accuracy, word choice, grammar, etc.
4
Purpose of the study
 To explore ways
 to integrate writing into college English
curriculum
 to teach writing effectively and engagingly
 to maximize the role of written output in
English language learning
5
Theoretical basis
 SLA theories
- Output hypothesis (Swain, 1985)
“the act of producing language (speaking or writing) constitutes, under
certain circumstances, part of the process of second language
learning.”
- Output driven hypothesis (文秋芳,2008)
Originally proposed for English majors, but applicable to non-English
majors too. Three sub-hypotheses:
1.
2.
3.
Output is equally, if not more effective than, input in promoting learners’ language
proficiency.
The training of productive skills of speaking, writing and translation is more practical and
relevant than that of receptive skills of reading and listening in terms of preparing
students for future profession.
Output driven model of integrated language teaching is more effective than teaching of
isolated skills.
6
Theoretical basis

Social constructivism
 Students:
 writer’s voice, experiences, interest, identity & context
 Individual cognitive, social activity, enculturation
 Collaborative writing and learning

Teacher: facilitator and coach rather than transmitter
 Neo-humanistic perspective

Learner’s inner life, cultural diversity
 The whole person
 Student choice & autonomy, feelings and interests, selfactualization, cooperation
7
Issues being addressed
1. How to maximize the role of written output in English
learning when integrating writing into college English
curriculum?
2. How to teach writing effectively and engagingly through
the English Writing Course?
8
Research design
 Case study
 Methods
- Interview
- Class observation
- Documents:
student writing, class notes and reflection pieces
course feedback
email and QQ correspondence
instructor courseware, course books and other teaching
materials
9
Participants
 Teacher participants
Teacher
Age
Year of
Teaching
Education
Overseas
Experience
Position
T1
52
30
PhD
8 years, US
Professor
T2
42
20
PhD
candidate
1 year, US
Professor
T3
36
7
PhD
2 years,
Canada
Associate
professor
T4
34
7
MA
10 months,
Singapore
Instructor
T5
30
6
MA
10 months,
Singapore
Instructor
10
Participants
 Student participants
11
Course description
 It started in 2008 as a selective course for non-English
major undergraduate students.
 It consists of ten sessions, each lasting 2.5 hours.
 It features team teaching, with five members coteaching and alternating.
 Differing from traditional product oriented writing
courses, it is designed with the assumption that writing
is not a mere skill, but a complex intellectual and social
process.
 Students are encouraged to use writing as a powerful
tool of thinking, learning, discovering and
communicating; learn to “think in my mind and
write from my heart” so as to “enrich life by
writing”.
12
Findings

How to maximize the role of written output in English
learning when integrating writing into college English
curriculum?




Holistic instructional practices
Skills integration: read to write, listen to write, talk to write (文秋芳
,2008)
Multiple goals: learn to write; write to learn, to express oneself, to
socialize, to discover
Multi-dimensions of learning: cognitive, metacognitive, social,
affective
13
Findings
2. How to teach writing effectively and engagingly
through the English Writing Course?
---Design Student centered writing pedagogy







Choosing teaching materials and writing topics, designing class
activities & teaching procedure
A dynamic approach: from process approach to process-genre
approach
Involving students in class activities, projects, feedback, evaluation &
reflection of learning
Drawing on students’ experience and interest
Using technology to appeal to the “digital natives”
Individualized instruction that addresses every student’s concerns
Bonding between instructor & students
14
Feature 1: Raising metalinguistic awareness

Explicit discussion of writing features and writing process, such as
the project of using a diagram to represent the writing process

Student reflection at the end of every class
Think about the following questions and write your answers. It is not
necessarily a complete essay. Two short paragraphs will do.
1.
2.

What are the most important things you have learned in this session?
What is the one thing that you still do not understand about writing or
the writing course?
Final student presentation on one’s best piece and the journey of
learning to write throughout this course
15
For Example:
Project: Diagrammatic representation of the
process of writing
 No stupid questions or things in this class (Feel
free to be as creative as you want).
 No framework (You can conceive of the whole
writing process in any way you like, using any image,
drawing, or metaphor)
16
Writing: many different processes & components
Clark & Ivanič (1999)
17
18
Feature 2:Writing on topics of interest
 Some topics chosen by students
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
How to maintain good relationship with roommates
How to date a girl friend in college
Associations in the university
The importance of managing time in university
How to deal with the problem about Internet addiction
From sub-healthy to healthy
19
Feature 3:Use technology to appeal
to the “digital natives”
 Based on the characteristics of the post-90s generation
who are skilled in using new media and technology
(“digital natives”, Prensky, 2001), encourage students
to

use writing software, online dictionaries and writing
websites
 practise skills for searching evidence on the Internet
 use class email account to share each other’s writing
 communicate with the instructor through QQ
20
Feature 4: multiple feedback and
individualized instruction
 Multiple sources of feedback: teacher, student, self
 Multiple form of feedback and individualized instruction
- Not just feedback on students’ writing products
- But feedback on the writing problems and concerns of
the students from the instructor, who summarizes
students’ problems in the reflection pieces and
addresses them next class. E.g.,
1.
2.
3.
How can I write creatively about some topics I am not familiar with?
The expressions looked up in the dictionary sometimes seem strange when I put
them together.
How to write better with limited vocabulary size?
21
Feature 5: bonding between the
instructor and students

Appeal to emotion, establish bond with students

Email message 1:

Email message 2:
Hello, everyone!
Attached are the ppt slides for the previous session. It is so nice to
spend the last week with you and I hope you can enjoy the class.
See you on Friday!
Chris
Dear everyone,
Attached are the ppt slides we need today, the last genre you are
going to learn and have a writing practice on, I promise. Hang on
there!
See you tonight!
Chris
22
Discussion: holistic, dynamic input





Knowledge of genre, features of good writing, writing strategies, etc.
Writing samples from students and other sources
Reading and listening materials for writing
Idea generation by brainstorming, outlining through student
discussion and other activities
Involving students emotionally, cognitively and socially through in
class and out of class interaction
23
Discussion: diverse, optimal output

Output
- Five writing projects, 3 drafts for each
- Journal writing
- Presentation on best piece and journey of learning to write
throughout the course
- Oral discussion of writing

Maximize the quality of output
- Use technology and other learning resources for writing
- Feedback from teacher, students and self
- Feedback on both students’ writing products and writing
concerns and problems from teacher
- Reflection
24
Discussion: writing as part of
students’ learning & life
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Learn to write: better awareness of good writing, writing
strategies and conventions, more evidence-based (use
references more often than before)
Write to learn: realizing the value of writing in English
learning
Write to enrich life: developing personal bond with
writing, using it as a means to socialize, to
communicate, to express oneself, to discover
Technology in writing and English learning
Affective development: more confident and passionate
about writing and language learning, from passive to
active learning, more inquisitive, taking more initiative
in learning
Think critically, questioning
25
Feedback from students
 我觉得我们这门课真的很好，特别是老师的精彩授课和同学们的
积极参与，这样的课程是我以前从未参加过的。毕竟我的英语不
是很好，显得不能完全接受课程内容，但总体上还是学到很多东
西，认识很多别的学院的同学，特别是课程上讲的英语写作技巧
和你的对我的作文批语，都使我受益匪浅。真的很感谢老师！感
谢老师的精彩授课！感谢老师对我的帮助！你的敬业让给我们佩
服！
26
Feedback from students
Dear Ms. Ding:
These are the whole assignments of the English writing
course. Although these assignments drive me a little
crazy sometimes，I appreciate the process of writing. It
is a pity that we did not take a photo for all of the
students and you, since we have learnt, discussed and
shared for more than a month.
27
Conclusion: CHED
 CHED : Curriculum, Holistic, Engaging, Dynamic
 More importance attached to written output and
more EFL writing courses
 Further research on the role of writing in English and
curriculum development
 Proficiency & humanism (self, emotional & social
development)
 Motivation & engagement from both teachers and
learners
 Dynamic and open, student-centered in course
design and implementation
28
References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Arnold, J. 1998. Towards more humanistic English teaching. ELT
Journal, 52(3), 235-242.
Badger, R., & White, G. 2000. A process genre approach to
teaching writing. ELT Journal,54(2): 153- 60.
Hyland, K. 2003. Genre-based pedagogies: A social response to
process. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12: 17-29.
Prensky, M. 2001. Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the
Horizon, 9(5):1-6.
Swain, M. 1985. Communicative competence: Some roles of
comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its
development. In Gass, S. and Madden, C. (Eds.), Input in
Second Language Acquisition, pp. 235-256. New York: Newbury
House.
Williams, M. & Burden, R. L. 1997. Psychology for Language Tea
chers: A Social Constructivist Approach. New York: Cambridge U
niversity Press.
文秋芳. 输出驱动假设与英语专业技能课程改革.外语界, 2008(2):2-9.
29
30