1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics
  4. Volume 139, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 139, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0019-0829
  • E-ISSN: 1783-1490
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

The paper reports on a case study of the writing processes and products of Tunisian EFL university students in an argumentative essay. The data came from (i) audio-taped think-aloud protocols followed by immediate retrospective comments, (ii) experts' comments and grades on the subjects' products, and (iii) a questionnaire administered to the students. Results of the process analysis, using an adapted version of the coding scheme used by A. RAIMES (1985;1987), corroborated by the questionnaire fmdings, showed that students wrote fluently and concerned themselves more with meaning than with granunatical correctness. However, they planned very little, rarely made notes before writing, and rarely rewrote. They faced difficulties especially in fmding the appropriate word and in organizing their ideas. At the local level, products showed inaccurate use of mechanics and granunar. At a more global level, most essays lacked clear thesis statement, substantial support of claims, adequate transitions, and hedged statements. The product problems were partially attributed to little planning, notemaking, and revising. The process strategies were themselves related to writing habits for which the classroom and the exam settings are partly responsible.

© 2003 John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.2143/ITL.139.0.2003202
2003-01-01
2023-06-04

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.2143/ITL.139.0.2003202
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Advanced Oxford dictionary
    Advanced Oxford dictionary (1990) Oxford: Oxford English.
  2. AL-ABED-AL-HAQ, F. & AHMED, A.S.E..A.
    (1994) Discourse problems in argumentative writing. World Englishes13, 307–323.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. ARNDT, V.
    (1987) Six writers in search of texts: A protocol-based study of L1 and L2 writing. ELT Journal41(4), 257–267.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. ATARI, O.F. & TRIKI, M.
    (2000) The formal features of oral and literate strategies of communication: Their implications for EFL writing revision. IRAL38, 95–107.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. BERRIL, D.P.
    (1996) Reframing argument from the metaphor of war. In D.P. Berril (Ed.), Perspectives on written argument (pp. 171–187). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, Inc.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. BHATIA, V.K.
    (1993) Analysing genre: Language use in professional settings. London: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. CONNOR, U.
    (1987) Argumentative pattern in students' essays: Cross cultural differences. In U. Connor and R. Kaplan (Eds.), Writing across languages (pp. 57–72). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. CONRAD, S.M. & GOLDSTEIN, L.M.
    (1990) Student input and negotiation of meaning in ESL writing conferences. TESOL Quarterly24 (3),443–460.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. CUMMING, A.
    (1995) Fostering writing expertise in ESL composition instruction: Modelling and evaluation. In D. Belcher and G. Braine (Eds.), Academic writing in a second language: Essays on research and pedagogy (pp. 375–397). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. (1989) Writing expertise and second language proficiency. Language Learning39,81–141.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. (1998) Theoretical perspectives on writing. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics18, 61–78.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. DAOUD, M.
    (2000) LSP in North Africa: Status, problems, and challenges. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics20, 77–96.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. DUDLEY-EVANS, T. and SWALES, J.
    (1980) Study modes and students from the Middle East. 109. Study modes and academic development of overseas students (pp. 91–98). The British Council.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. ENKVIST, N.E.
    (1990) Seven problems in the study of coherence and interpretability. In U. Connor and A.M. Johns (Eds.), Coherence in writing: Research and pedagogical perspectives (pp. 11–28). Alexandria, VA: TESOL.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. ERICSSON, K.A. and SIMON , H. A.
    (1984) Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. FAERCH, C. and KASPER, G.
    (Eds.) (1983) Strategies in interlanguage communications. London: Longman, Ltd.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. FAKHRI, A.
    (1994) Text organisation and transfer: The case of Arab ESL learners. IRAL, XXII, (1), 79–86.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. FATHMAN, A.K. and WHALLEY , E.
    (1990) Teacher response to student writing: Focus on form versus content. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second Language writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 178–190). New York: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. FRIEDLANDER, A.
    (1990) Composing in English: Effects of a fITst language on writing in English as a second languageIn B. Kroll (Ed.), Second Language writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp.109–125). New York: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. GOVIER, T.
    (1996) Writers, readers, and arguments. In D.R. Berril (Ed.), Perspectives on written argument (pp. 73–89). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. HALIMAH, A.M.
    (2001) Rhetorical duality and Arabic speaking EST learners. English for Specific Purposes20, 111–139.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. HATCH, E.
    (1992) Discourse and language education. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. HYLAND, K.
    (1994) Hedging academic writing and EAP textbooks. English for Specific Purposes18 (3), 239–256.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. KAMEL, G.
    (1989) Argumentative writing by Arab learners of English as a foreign and second language: An empirical investigation of contrastive rhetoric. Dissertation Abstracts International50 (3), 677A.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. KAMIMURA, T.
    (2000) Integration of process and product orientations in EFL writing instruction. RELC Journal31 (2), 1–28.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. KAPLAN, R.B.
    (1966) Cultural thought patterns in intercultural education. Language Learning16 (1), 1–20.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. (1987) Cultural thought patterns revisited. In U. Connor and R.B. Kaplan (Eds.), Writing across languages: Analysis of L2 text (pp. 9–20). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing company.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. LAY, N.D.S.
    (1982) Composing process of adult ESL learners: A case study. TESOL Quarterly, 16 (3), 406.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. MAAMOURI-GHRIB, E.
    (2001) Thinking and writing in EFL: Cutting off Medusa's head. ITL Review of Applied Linguistics, 133–134, 243–269.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. MAHFOUDHI, A.
    (2001a) Teaching EFL writing: Students' hidden agenda. Cahiers Linguistiques d'Ottawa29, 19–50.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. (2001b) ESL/EFL writing: Towards an integrative approach. Indian Journal of Applied Linguistics27(2), 149–166.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. OSTLER, S.E.
    (1987) English in parallels: A comparison of English and Arabic prose. In U. Connor and R. Kaplan (Eds.), Writing across languages: Analysis of L2 text (pp. 169–184). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. OUAOUICHA, D.
    (1986) Contrastive rhetoric and structure of learnerproduced argumentative texts in Arabic and English. Dissertation Abstracts International47 (9), 3339A.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. RAIMES, A.
    (1985) What unskilled ESL learners do as they write: A classroom study of composing. Tesol Quarterly25 (3), 407–430.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. (1987) Language proficiency, writing ability, and composing strategies: A study of ESL college student writers. Language Learning37, 439–468.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. ROSE, M.
    (1980) Rigid Rules, inflexible plans and the stifling of language: A cognitive analysis of writers= block. College Composition and Communication31 (4), 389–401.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. SASAKI, M.
    (2000) Toward an empirical model of EFL writing processes: An exploratory study. Journal of Second Language Writing9(3), 259–291.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. SASAKI, M. & HIROSE, K.
    (1996) Explanatory variables for EFL students' expository writing. Language Learning46(1), 137–174.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. SCHLEPPEGRELL, M.J.
    (1996) Conjunction in spoken English and ESL writing. Applied Linguistics17 (3), 271–285.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. SHIH, M.
    (1998) ESL writers' grammar editing startegies. College ESL8 (2), 64–86.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. SILVA, T.
    (1993) Toward an understanding of the distinct nature of L2 writing: The ESL research and its implications. TESOL Quarterly41 (1), 37–43.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. SWALES, J.
    (1990) Genre Analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. ZAMEL, V.
    (1982) Writing: The process of discovering meaning. TESOL Quarterly16 (2), 195–209.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. (1983) The composing process of advanced ESL students: Six case studies. TESOL Quarterly17 (2), 165–187.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. ZHU, W.
    (2001) Performing argumentative writing in English: Difficulties, processes, and strategies. TESL Canada Journal/Revue TESL Canada19(1),34–50.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.2143/ITL.139.0.2003202
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article

Most Cited

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