1887
Volume 123, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0019-0829
  • E-ISSN: 1783-1490
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

This paper reports on an empirical examination of the effect of instructors' formal training, professional experience, culturo-linguistic background, and exposure to the local context on the evaluation of EFL composition. A total of 106 English-native and Arabic-native instructors, with varying academic training, teaching experience, and exposure to the local context of EFL instruction, evaluated the language, the contents, and the rhetorical structures of two EFL compositions - written by Arabic-native speakers - using 10-point scales.

Findings show that instructor's culturo-linguistic background was evidently the most influential factor on the evaluation of EFL composition. Instructor 's exposure to the local Arabic context of EFL instruction testified to confirm this effect.

With respect to the effect of instructor's teaching experience on the evaluation of EFL composition, the findings reveal that expe-rienced instructors appear to be more rigid in their evaluation of EFL composition than their less experienced counterparts. The effect of instructor's formal training on the evaluation of EFL composition is generally inconsistent.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/itl.123-124.04alh
1999-01-01
2019-10-21
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. ALHARBI, L.
    (1997) Rhetorical Transfer Across Cultures : English into Arabic and Arabic into English”. Journal Of Applied Linguistics, 11, 2, 69-94.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. (1998) An investigation of the correlation between language proficiency, cultural awareness and rhetorical performance of ESL learner. Review of Applied Linguistics, 118-120, 91-106.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. BARRETT, L.
    et all (1986) Researching practice : evaluating assessment essays. College Composition and Communication, 37, 315-27.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. BASHAM, C. and KWACHKA, D.
    (1991) Reading the wold differently : A cross-cultural approach to writing assessment. In : Hamp-Lyons, L. (ed.) Assessing Second Language writing in Academic Contexts. New Jersey : Ablex, p.111-126.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. BROWN, J.
    (1991) Do English and ESL faculty rate writing samples differently?TESOL Quarterly, 25, 587-603.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. CHARNEY, D.
    (1984) The validity of using holistic scoring to evaluate writing : A Critical overview. Research in the teaching of English, 18, 65-81.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. CHAUDRON, C.
    (1983) Research on metalinguistic judgements : A review of theory, method, and results. Language Learning, 33,1, 343-377.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. CONNOR, U.
    (1996) Contrastive Rhetoric : Cross-cultural Aspects of Second Language Writing. New York : Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. COOPER, C.
    (1977) Holistic evaluation of writing. In Cooper C. & ODELL, L. (Eds) Evaluating Writing. University of Illinois Press. Urbana, Illinois, USA.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. COPPIETERS, R.
    (1987) Competence differences between native and near-native speakers. Language, 63,3, 544-573.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. CUMMING, A.
    (1990) Expertise in evaluating second language composition. Language Testing, 7, 31-51.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. DEGENHART, R. and TAKALA, S.
    (1988) Developing a rating method for stylistic preference : A cross-cultural pilot study. In : Purves, A. (ed. )Writing Across Languages and Cultures : Issues in Contrastive Rhetoric. Sage, USA. p.79-106.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. ELU, R.
    (1986) Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. JACOBS
    , et all. (1981) Testing ESL composition : A practical approach. Rowley, MA : Newbury House.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. KACHRU, Y.
    (1988) Writers in Hindi and English. In : Purves, A. (Ed.) (1988) Writing Across Languages and Cultures. California : Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. KAPLAN, R.
    (1966) Cultural though patterns in inter-cultural education. Language Learning16, 1-20.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. (1978) ‘Contrastive rhetoric : some hypothesis.’ ITL Review of Applied Linguistics37-40, 61-72.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. KHALIL, A.
    (1985) Communicative error evaluation: Native speaker’s evaluation and interpretation of writer errors of oral EFL learners. TESOL, 19,2, 335-351.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. KOBAYASHI, H. and RlNNERT, C.
    (1996) Factors affecting composition evaluation in an EFL context : Cultural rhetorical patterns and readers’ background. Language Learning, 46,3, 397-437.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. KOBAYASHI, T.
    (1992) Native and normative reactions to ESL compositions. TESOL26,1, 81-112.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. LAND, R. and WHITLEY, C.
    (1989) ‘Evaluating second language essays in regular composition classes : Toward a pluralistic US rhetoric’. In : Johnson, D. and Roen, D. (Eds.). Richness In Writing : Empowering ESL Students. New York : Longman. P.284-293.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. PIAZZA, L.
    (1980) French tolerance for grammatical errors made by Americans. Modern Language Journal64,4, 422-427.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. REID, J.
    (1989) English as second language composition in higher education: the expectations of the academic audience. In : Johnson, D. and Roen, D. (Eds.). Richness In Writing: Empowering ESL Students. New York : Longman. P.220-235.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. SANTOS, T.
    (1988) Professors’ reactions to the academic writing of normative-speaking students. TESOL22,1, 69-90.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. SCARCELLA, R.
    (1984) How writers orient their readers to expository essays : A comparative study of native and normative English writers. TESOL quarterly, 18, 671-689.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. SHEOREY, R.
    (1986) Error-perceptions of native-speaking and non-native speaking teachers of ESL. ELT40,4, 306-312.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. TAKASHIMA, H.
    (1987) To what extent are non-native speakers qualified to correct free composition? A case study. The British Journal of Language Teaching, 25,1, 43-48.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. TOMIYAMA, M.
    (1980) Grammatical errors and communicational breakdown. TESOL Quarterly, 14, 71-79.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. VANN, et all. R.
    (1991) Error gravity: A study of faculty opinion of ESL errors. In : Hamp-Lyons, L. (ed.) Assessing Second Language writing in Academic Contexts. New Jersey : Ablex. p.181-211.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. VAUGHAN, C.
    (1991) Holistic assessment : What goes on in the rater’s mind?In : Hamp-Lyons, L. (ed.) Assessing Second Language writing in Academic Contexts. New Jersey : Ablex, p.111-126.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. WEIGLE, S.
    (1994) Effective of training on raters of ESL compositions. Language Testing, 11, 2, 197-218.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. WONG, H.
    (1990) The use of rhetorical questions in written argumentative discourse. Pragmatic and Language Learning, 1, 187-208.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/itl.123-124.04alh
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error