This study has the main objective of evaluating the effectiveness of the writing component of the program applied at the Department of Basic English (DBE) and the Department of Modern Languages (DML) at Middle East Technical University (METU) in the 2010-2011 academic year in terms of program objectives, materials and content, teaching-learning process and the assessment of the writing skills. The opinions of the DBE and DML instructors, program coordinators and students as well as the content course instructors at different departments at METU were mainly obtained via questionnaires and interviews. The data collected via the questionnaires were analyzed using SPSS 15 while the analysis of all the qualitative data was done though content analysis. The results of the questionnaires indicated that the writing components of the program at the DBE and the DML were generally effective as for the dimensions of the programs as specified in the research questions from the perspective of instructors and students. However, the qualitative data revealed participants&rsquo / suggestions for the improvement of the existing writing programs at both departments. Some of the major conclusions that can be drawn from DBE students&rsquo / and instructors&rsquo / suggestions are as follows: There is a need to switch the focus from discourse-level writing to more freewriting practices through more student-centered activities / the materials should be more visually attractive / the assessment procedure applied to test students&rsquo / writing ability in the mid-terms should be standardized and the writing tasks as tested in the English Proficiency Exam (EPE) should be focused on in writing classes. On the other hand, as for the writing program at the DML, the need for the diversification of the writing genres, topics and the citation rules covered in the ENG 101 and ENG 102 courses depending on students&rsquo / departments was emphasized by the DML participants. Similarly, DBE participants underlined the need for departmentrelated content in writing materials. Also, the content course instructors agreed that the writing program applied at the DBE and the DML should be department-specific. In other words, this study displayed the necessity to conduct a needs analysis aiming to reveal DBE and DML students&rsquo / writing needs for their departments.

In recent years, US elementary and secondary education has put more emphasis on advancing students’ academic literacy. To address this need, many teachers have looked to systemic functional linguistics (SFL) theory to frame writing instruction. Drawing from this literature, this report identifies major pedagogical principles relevant for an English as a foreign language (EFL) instructional context, delineates the linguistic markers characteristic of academic registers, and expands on the existing literature in regards to feedback and error correction. SFL-informed literacy instruction can benefit English language instruction in countries such as South Korea, where learners’ writing development has traditionally been neglected. The report begins with a brief overview of systemic functional linguistics, and follows with a review of the literature on SFL-based writing pedagogy. Implications for EFL educational settings are discussed. / text

This three-article dissertation emerges from interests in corpus linguistics (CL), corpus-based discourse analysis, and corpus-informed pedagogy for second language (L2) writing classrooms. A brief summary of each article follows: Article #1: Using the localized, place-based discourse of the Rosemont Copper Mine debate of southern Arizona, the first article produces a corpus-based discourse analysis of texts from the primary interest groups involved in the mine proposal. The ecolinguistic analysis details linguistic patterns within the interest groups' texts and discusses how these grammatical and semantic features form rhetorical constellations, i.e. patterns of linguistic features performing a shared rhetorical purpose, within the debate. Findings show that the industry group produces rhetoric of authority, certainty, and dominion through deployment of particular constellations of lexicogrammatical features while the linguistic elements in the environmental advocacy texts construe uncertainty, doubt, aesthetic value, and environmental stewardship. Article #2: The second article details an integration of geographical information system (GIS) and CL techniques with an ecolinguistics-informed analytical framework for the analysis of the same contentious environmental debate from southern Arizona. The application of GIS and CL procedures enabled the mapping of place name mentions present within two interest group corpora as well as the frequency of particular semantic tags and semantic tag sets that co-occur with specific places prominent in the debate. The findings and the GIS visualizations exhibit how different interest groups refer to and represent geographical places within their discourse and how these references to places index ideological positions towards the environment. Article #3: The final article details a study in which twenty-one international students in the second course of an undergraduate writing program sequence at a U.S. university studied the local debate regarding the Rosemont Copper Mine. The participants analyzed texts from two primary interest groups, a local, environmental group and an international mining company, and participated in a series of corpus-aided activities using corpus data derived from texts from the opposing groups. The contrastive analyses made possible through the study of texts and corpus data from the two sharply distinct groups enabled students to notice, analyze, and discuss the meaningful and purposeful variation in word choice and rhetorical strategies present in the texts, the data, and the debate. The article provides a model for how corpus data can be integrated into writing classrooms for advancing students' abilities to analyze language and increase rhetorical awareness. The introductory chapter provides an overview of the Rosemont Copper Mine debate, ecolinguistics, and corpus linguistics. This opening chapter is followed by three articles (corresponding to Chapters 2, 3, and 4), and the dissertation concludes with a discussion of implications of the findings and potential for future research.

The present study investigated how 6 Korean graduate students at a Canadian university used a suite of multiple Web-based reference resources (named i-Conc), consisting of concordancers and dictionaries, as a cognitive tool for solving linguistic problems encountered over the course of completing—in English, their second language (L2)—an academic writing assignment for one of their graduate courses. Using a mixed methods design employing surveys, interviews, screen recordings, a query tracking log, and detailed case studies, the thesis provides rich descriptions of (a) the processes, and outcomes of the 6 participants’ uses of i-Conc as a reference tool for their writing authentic academic tasks and (b) their perceptions of the suite as a means of writing assistance. Overall, i-Conc served as an intellectual partner that aided the participants in strategically solving lexical and grammatical problems during their writing assignments: About 70 % of the problems they addressed with i-Conc resulted in correct text formulations or revisions. The different resources in i-Conc were each shown to have unique functions for which they were best suited, suggesting that concordancing may optimally be consulted in combination with, not in place of, other resources. The benefits of consulting i-Conc for L2 writing went beyond simply helping the participants’ problem solving to potentially facilitating their language acquisition. Input-feedback interactions with the reference suite prompted the participants to carry out robust meaning negotiations in their efforts to verify their intuitive hypotheses and to venture beyond their current linguistic repertoires. Participants acted on these potential benefits somewhat differently. Case studies and cross-case analyses demonstrated complex interactions between the participants’ individual traits and goals, the educational contexts for which they were writing, and their perceptions and evaluations of particular affordances provided by i-Conc. These findings imply that to build meaningful cognitive partnerships with reference tools, L2 writers should receive progressive guidance on principles for effective reference resource consultation along with training in strategies for using different types of resources, contingent on individuals’ abilities and ongoing needs arising from their macro and micro contexts for writing and for language learning.

The present study investigated how 6 Korean graduate students at a Canadian university used a suite of multiple Web-based reference resources (named i-Conc), consisting of concordancers and dictionaries, as a cognitive tool for solving linguistic problems encountered over the course of completing—in English, their second language (L2)—an academic writing assignment for one of their graduate courses. Using a mixed methods design employing surveys, interviews, screen recordings, a query tracking log, and detailed case studies, the thesis provides rich descriptions of (a) the processes, and outcomes of the 6 participants’ uses of i-Conc as a reference tool for their writing authentic academic tasks and (b) their perceptions of the suite as a means of writing assistance. Overall, i-Conc served as an intellectual partner that aided the participants in strategically solving lexical and grammatical problems during their writing assignments: About 70 % of the problems they addressed with i-Conc resulted in correct text formulations or revisions. The different resources in i-Conc were each shown to have unique functions for which they were best suited, suggesting that concordancing may optimally be consulted in combination with, not in place of, other resources. The benefits of consulting i-Conc for L2 writing went beyond simply helping the participants’ problem solving to potentially facilitating their language acquisition. Input-feedback interactions with the reference suite prompted the participants to carry out robust meaning negotiations in their efforts to verify their intuitive hypotheses and to venture beyond their current linguistic repertoires. Participants acted on these potential benefits somewhat differently. Case studies and cross-case analyses demonstrated complex interactions between the participants’ individual traits and goals, the educational contexts for which they were writing, and their perceptions and evaluations of particular affordances provided by i-Conc. These findings imply that to build meaningful cognitive partnerships with reference tools, L2 writers should receive progressive guidance on principles for effective reference resource consultation along with training in strategies for using different types of resources, contingent on individuals’ abilities and ongoing needs arising from their macro and micro contexts for writing and for language learning.

The ability to write in a second language is one of the major skills required in academic settings. However, research about the effectiveness of academic programs on second language writing in long term perspective is rather scarce and the findings are mixed (e.g. Archibald, 2001; Elder & O’Loughlin, 2003; Hu, 2007; Knoch et al., 2014, 2015; Storch 2007). The present study aimed to contribute further empirical evidence about the effectiveness of academic training on the development of the writing skills of Vietnamese second language learners enrolled in an undergraduate English program. The investigation was designed in view of the L2 writing standards set by the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) and in reference to the specificities of the Vietnamese English language educational system. The sample involved a total of 90 participants, 30 from each of the following CEFR English language proficiency levels: B1, B2, and C1. The instrument was modeled after the IELTS Academic Module Writing Task 2 which requires test-takers to write a minimum of 250-word essay on a given prompt. The participants’ essays were scored by two independent raters following the IELTS Writing Task 2 Band Descriptors. The data was analyzed through 5 one-way ANOVAs, which aimed to compare the three levels of proficiency, B1, B2, and C1, on their overall writing scores, and on each of the two macro (Task Response and Cohesion and Coherence) and micro sills (Lexical Resources and Grammatical Range and Accuracy) The results revealed two main trends. First, it was found that the writing skills of Vietnamese L2 learners of English have shown a significant improvement in the course of their study, across proficiency levels. Second, the development was of a bigger magnitude between levels B1 and B2 and on a smaller scale between levels B2 and C1. The latter trend appears more meaningful when juxtaposed with the expected IELTS writing band score ranges for each of the three CEFR levels investigated in the present study. Specifically, the obtained scores matched the CEFR standards at level B2, but were above the expected minimum score for level B1 and below the minimum expected score for level C1. These findings carry valuable implications for the specific Vietnamese educational context, highlighting both the strengths and lacks of the English language writing curriculum. They pinpoint issues related to the placement of students in CEFR levels without specific empirical data as well as raise questions about the time, effort, and teaching practices necessary to secure learners’ progress from lower to higher proficiency, particularly after level B1. Another contribution of the study is that it examined developments in L2 academic writing both on the macro and micro level, and has, thus, offered a more comprehensive picture of the different components of the writing skill and their development through a course of study. In contrast, existing research has either looked at the writing skill in a holistic way or focused on one or some of its elements, but has rarely approached writing as a balanced composite of macro and micro skills.

The increasing interest in how stance is expressed specifically in academic writing in English has generated extensive research in the past decades. Focusing on the grammatical marking of stance, this comparative study investigates the use of stance adverbials by native (L1) and nonnative (L2) speakers of English in a corpus of student academic writing. The aim is to examine the most distinctive differences and similarities in the use of adverbial stance markers by each student group. The material comes from the British Academic Writing in English (BAWE) corpus, a collection of proficient writing by English L1 and L2 students from different firstlanguage backgrounds. Using quantitative methods and a semantically-based classification, the forms and types of stance adverbials most frequently used by the two student groups are identified and compared. The findings indicate that L1 students employ more adverbial stance markers overall, which contradicts results from previous research, but that both L1 and L2 students make use predominantly of a limited number of stance adverbials. The analysis of the most frequently used adverbials indicates underuse (e.g. perhaps) and overuse (e.g. kind of, mainly ) of specific markers on the part of the L2 group. The results partially invalidate the hypothesis tested that L2 students both rely on a narrower range of stance adverbials and employ them more frequently than L1 students.

abstract: This study articulates a framework of writing strategies and validates the framework by using it to examine the writing process of researchers as they write journal articles for publication. The framework advances a definition of writing strategies and a classification system for categorizing strategies that is based on strategic goals. In order to develop the framework, I first synthesize existing literature on writing strategies found in second language writing studies, composition studies, and second language acquisition. I then observe the writing process of four researchers as they write journal articles for publication and use the framework to analyze participants’ goals, their strategies for accomplishing goals, the resources they use to carry out strategies, and the variables that influence their goals and strategies. Data for the study was collected using qualitative methods, including video recordings of writing activities, stimulated-recall interviews, questionnaires, and semi-structured interviews. The study shows that the framework introduced in the study is useful for analyzing writers’ strategies in a comprehensive way. An operationalizable definition of ‘writing strategies’ is the conscious and internalized agentive ideas of a writer about the best way to act, often with the use of resources, in order to reach specific writing goals embedded in a context. Writing strategies can be categorized into seven types of strategic goals: composing, coping, learning, communicating, self-representation, meta-strategies, and publishing. The framework provides a way to understand writing strategies holistically—as a unit of goal, action, and resource—and highlights variability in writers’ actions and use of resources. Some of this variability in writers’ strategies can be explained by the influence of various contextual factors, which are identified in the analysis. The dissertation concludes with a discussion of how the framework can be used to inform future research and classroom teaching on writing strategies. / Dissertation/Thesis / Doctoral Dissertation Applied Linguistics 2016

abstract: Situated in the influx of Chinese students entering U.S. higher education and the L2 writing research growing interests in investigating learners’ experience to gain further insights into their emic perspectives on English literacy development, this dissertation argues that the identifying the beliefs as the underlying principle shaping and being shaped by our experience. In this dissertation, I propose a theoretical framework of beliefs and validates the framework by using it to examine multilingual writers’ learning experience in the context of First Year Composition. The framework advances a definition of beliefs and a framework demonstrating the relationship among three constructs—perception, attitude, and behavior. In order to develop the framework, I first synthesized existing literature on language learning beliefs and argue the scarcity of L2 writing researchers’ discussing belief when exploring learners’ experience. I define beliefs as an individual’s generalizations from the mental construction of the experience, based on evaluation and judgment, thus are predisposed to actions. I proposed a framework of belief, consisting three mental constructs—perception, attitude and action—to identify and examine factors contributing the formation and change of beliefs. I drew on drawing on Dewey's theory of experience and Rokeach's (1968) belief theory, and contextual approach to beliefs in the field of second language acquisition. I analyzed the interview data of twenty-two Chinses students accounting their English learning experiences across four different contexts, including English class in China, TOEFL training courses, intensive English program, and FYC classroom. The findings show that their beliefs were formed and transformed in the contexts before FYC. They perceived all the writing learning in those courses as similar content and curriculum, but the attitudes vary regarding the immediate contexts and long-term goal of using the knowledge. They believe grammar and vocabulary is the “king’s way,” the most effective and economic approach, which was emphasized in the test-oriented culture. Moreover, the repetitive course content and various pedagogies, including multiple revisions and the requirement of visiting writing center, have been perceived as requiring demonstration more efforts, which in turn prompted them to develop their own negotiation strategies, the actions, to gain more credits for the class. This dissertation concludes that the beliefs can be inferred from these all three constructs, but to change beliefs of learners, we need to make them explicit and incorporate them into writing instruction or curriculum design. Implications on how to further the research of beliefs as well as translating these findings into classroom pedagogies are also discussed. The dissertation concludes with a discussion of how the framework can be used to inform future research and classroom practices informed by writing beliefs identified in this study. / Dissertation/Thesis / Doctoral Dissertation English 2017

This corpus-based study analyzes different types of epistemic markers used in argumentative essays by University students. More specifically it compares Swedish L2 writers and English L1 writers. The scope of the analysis covers epistemic modal verbs, lexical verbs and adverbs. A number of markers are counted to see which expressions are preferred by L1 and L2 writers respectively and if the frequency rates differ between the two groups. Further, it discusses whether the non-native writers use epistemic markers appropriate to an academic register, and an attempt is made to see whether the L1 and L2 writers show similar patterns of ‘committing’ to and ‘distancing’ themselves to their arguments. The results reveal a few notable differences between the Swedish and English writers. A tendency is seen among the L2 writers to ‘overuse’ certain expressions, particularly in the category of lexical verbs. Compared to the native writers, the L2 writers display higher frequency rates when it comes to markers that are most commonly found in spoken conversation. Further the L2 writers seem to display more ‘writer visibility’ than the L1 writers do, which could perhaps be due to differences in writing culture. The findings also suggest that Swedish L2 writers, even on a relatively advanced level, may have difficulties in mastering modal expressions in English.