Like other social institutions, universities have been created and administered by and for a white-male dominant culture that continues to marginalize women and anyone else designated as -Other- according to race, class, ethnicity, ability, age, size, and sexuality. This discussion questions the dominant model of standard written discourse in the college English classroom where linear, abstract argument centered on autonomous thinking and reasoning prevails. It explores how such a discourse privileges a patriarchal system of education that subordinates other ways of learning and writing, particularly those that may be closely associated with contemporary women's learning, and it looks at some experimental writing strategies for teachers and students who want to challenge the dominant model of discourse within the institution and perhaps better enable students to write with a sense of their own goals and purposes. / Graduation date: 1994

Not available / text

Basic writers often require different courses than traditional Freshman Composition 1 students to succeed in college. Ball State University's basic writing program offers a two-semester sequence that provides students with additional time and attention, thereby addressing these students' special needs. The program encourages students to see themselves as academic writers and as part of the academic community.This study examined the degree of presence of academic voice in students' writing as measured at four intervals during the program's initial year. A 2 x 4 analysis of variance measured change in academic voice for female and male students, using the Academic Voice Checksheet. In addition, students' levels of confidence was measured using the Daly-Miller Writing Apprehension Test (W.A.T.) and correlated to the presence of academic voice using the Pearson product-moment correlation. Findings are presented in an analysis of the study group as a whole and in an analysis of six individual students' work. Those students' profiles were examined for overall academic voice, discrete features of academic voice, the W.A.T. overall scores, and specific questions dealing with student confidence.The analysis revealed that a change in the degree of presence of academic voice occured during the two-semester sequence. However, male and female students were seen to have the same basic profile, thereby suggesting no difference according to sex of student, challenging current gender theory. A comparison of the initial measurement and the final measurement indicated a positive change in a majority of academic voice scores.A correlation between the academic voice score and a decrease in students' writing apprehension was found in the final measurements. Five percent of students' W.A.T. score may be explained by the academic voice measurement. In the study group, 65 percent of the students showed a decrease in W.A.T. scores between the two measurements, indicating a positive lessening of writing apprehension.This study suggests that the basic writing sequence at Ball State University is providing an environment that facilitates students' use of academic voice and lessens their writing apprehension. Both factors enhance students' opportunities for academic success. / Department of English

College basic writers are often misunderstood. Much of the literature available on these writers depicts them as a large homogeneous group. Ignored is the diversity that exists within this population. According to George Jensen and John DiTiberio, personality type as measured by the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is a neglected factor in most composition research that aids in ascertaining and appreciating the diversity and strengths of basic writers.Case study methodology was used to investigate whether a relationship existed between the personality types of thirty-four basic writers at Ball State University and the writing strategies they used. Triangulation of data provided a thick description of the students. Scores from pre- and post-good writing questionnaires and process instruments (process logs and self-evaluations), student journals, student writing, participant-observers fieldnotes, and the teacher-researcher's journal enriched and supplemented the MBTI results.Findings are presented in a group portrait and four case studies. The group portrait demonstrates that 1) most of the students were not highly apprehensive about writing; 2) they were a diverse group with fifteen of the sixteen MBTI personality types represented; and 3) they displayed a wide variety of writing strategies.The four case study subjects represent four of the sixteen MBTI personality types (ISTJ, ISFP, ESTJ, ENTP) each with a different dominant function. These students demonstrated that they were diverse in their attitudes about writing, degree of writing apprehension, their personality types, and their use of writing strategies. The case study subjects often used strategies that supported their personality preferences, were able to tap into previously unused strategies that coincided with those preferred preferences, or incorporated unpreferred processes into their composing strategies. While personality type apparently played a major role in the students' writing strategies, previous experiences, past writing instruction, successes and failures, and attitudes about "English" also affected them. / Department of English

This mixed model study informed by a multi-modal approach investigated the relationship between reading aloud and the student revision process. Participants for this study were undergraduate juniors and seniors enrolled in any one of four sections of English 393 (Writing Competency Course) at Ball State University during the summer semester of 2003. These students had previously failed the Writing Competency Exam at Ball State; therefore, they had to complete English 393 successfully to fulfill Ball State's writing competency requirement and, ultimately, to graduate. Specifically, this study examined what types of surface and global features that these English 393 students noticed when reading their initial essay drafts aloud to themselves and what global revisions they made, if any, based upon these initial observations. Methods used were audio recordings, observation logs, multiple copies of student drafts, pre- and postattitudinal surveys, read-aloud surveys, post-revision surveys, introductory and concluding instructor surveys, additional instructor surveys, and reviews of composition/rhetoric textbooks.Results of this study indicated that students enrolled in English 393 courses at Ball State University during the summer of 2003 predominantly noticed surface features in their essays as a result of reading their initial drafts aloud to themselves. Therefore, using this read-aloud method did not prompt the large majority of these junior- and senior-level English 393 students to make global revisions in their drafts. They predominantly made surface-level revisions, indicative of the types of revisions that freshman college writers make. While one student from the population did make global revisions as a result of using the read-aloud method, the researcher attributed this anomaly to the student's probable oral learning style and/or the student's previous experience using the read-aloud method. / Department of English

Within recent years there have been numerous scholarly discussions describing the tendency to erect various binaries between the fields of composition and creative writing. In order to investigate some of these binaries, I used an ethnographic methodology and the Engestrom model of activity systems to examine one first-year composition and one introductory creative writing classroom. Doing so, I came to understand how several factors, such as mediated artifacts, rules, and division of labor affected how the instructors taught writing, how these factors affected the writing process of students, and what was produced in the classroom. Ultimately, the methodological lens of ethnography, where the perspective of instructors and students was at the forefront of inquiry, integrated with an exploration into the structure of activities, allowed me to interrogate previous non-empirical, lore-based scholarship. / Department of English

This study unravels the connector patterns and mental activities that the Chinese learners of English as a Second Language (ESL) and native-English speakers display/perform upon the adoption of adversative, causal and temporal connectors while writing English argumentations, descriptions and narrations. It focuses on the ways in which the Chinese ESL learners’ thinking and connector production recursively interact in meaning-building processes. To elicit information of the writers’ mental processes, three English writing tasks with concurrent verbal reports were used as main elicitation tools. Chinese university students from Low, Mid and High proficiency levels and native-American-English users (Native) were asked to speak out their thoughts while writing English argumentations, descriptions and narrations. Data were also elicited from the retrospective verbal reports and following-up interviews which were conducted right after each writing and concurrent verbal report. Comparison of connector patterns in English texts produced by the Chinese and native-English writers suggests that the Chinese Mid and Low groups use significantly more connectors than the Native group while connector frequencies between the Chinese High and the Native group reveal no significant difference. It has been argued that the High-level students, being more linguistically skilled, can use connectors as well as other cohesive devices to form textual connections as their native-English-speaking counterparts. However, the Mid and Low-level writers, lacking abilities of manipulating other cohesive devices, tend to rely mainly on connectors. Moreover, comparison between the three Chinese groups indicates that the Mid uses significantly more connectors in English texts than the High and Low groups. The Mid group, on the one hand, is not linguistically mature enough to use various cohesive devices as skillfully as the High group, but, on the other hand, has more knowledge on the connector usage than the Low. When connectors were analyzed by category, it is found that the Chinese students use fewer adversative connectors in argumentations and narrations than the native-English writers. This pattern is found to have arisen from the Chinese students’ rigid textual development. ESL learners, due to their poor second language (L2) proficiency, cannot develop sophisticated argumentative and narrative structures. Instead of resorting to counter-arguments and reverse-order narration, they tend to simply list ideas. This could result in lower occurrences of adversative connectors in their argumentations and narrations. The data that are extracted from concurrent verbal reports reveal that the Chinese students use their first language (L1) for five mental activities: (1) initiation, (2) revision, (3) comment-making, (4) decision-making, and (5) monologue-conducting while using L2 for only two: initiation and revision. Examinations on the cognitive demand of the mental activities show that ESL learners rely more on their L1 to perform the cognitively more demanding activities such as comment-making, decision-making and monologue-conducting. Furthermore, the verbal data show that the L2 proficiency levels affect ESL writers’ mental activities in two ways. First, proficient ESL learners report larger linguistic units than the less proficient ones. Second, proficient ESL learners report higher proportions of cognitively more demanding activities than the less proficient ones. These two patterns are argued to result from the different working memory capacities of the proficient and less proficient ESL writers as well as the different ways of processing information in their working memory. Finally, a model of L2 writing process is developed to delineate how L2 proficiency, working memory and cognitive process interact and contribute to L2 writing process. Theoretically, this L2 model refines the L1 model and enriches the current understanding of the L2 writing process in three ways. First, mental activities are classified according to how much cognitive workload they demand. Such categorization is necessary because it explains ESL learners’ language choice while doing verbal reports and also explains the difficulties the learners encounter in L2 writing. Second, the L2 model separates the composing process as pre- and post-stage, which allows us to see how frequencies and types of mental activities differ in the two phases. Third, by including language choice, the L2 model addresses a wider interpretation of the mental activities in writing process. Pedagogically, the comprehensive and explanatory accounts of the connector patterns and mental activities address the problems that ESL learners have when using connectors in L2 writing. This will definitely facilitate the teaching of L2 writing.

Call number: LD2668 .T4 1985 M663 / Master of Arts

This thesis was a critical analysis of students academic second language writing at Sokoine University of Agriculture. Student writing in English as a second language in higher education has excited much interest in the English as a Second Language writing research and discussion in Tanzania. The interest was motivated by frequent criticisms from examiners regarding students literacy performance in the English as a Second Language writing in the post primary and higher education where the language of instruction is English as is configured in the Tanzanian language policy.

This thesis was a critical analysis of students academic second language writing at Sokoine University of Agriculture. Student writing in English as a second language in higher education has excited much interest in the English as a Second Language writing research and discussion in Tanzania. The interest was motivated by frequent criticisms from examiners regarding students literacy performance in the English as a Second Language writing in the post primary and higher education where the language of instruction is English as is configured in the Tanzanian language policy.