Lin Hin-Sze. / Thesis (M.Phil.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2001. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 154-160). / Abstracts in English and Chinese. / ABSTRACT --- p.ii / ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS --- p.v / LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES --- p.ix / CHAPTER / Chapter 1 --- INTRODUCTION --- p.1 / Chapter 1.1 --- Background --- p.1 / Chapter 1.2 --- Dilemma --- p.3 / Chapter 1.3 --- Purpose --- p.4 / Chapter 1.4 --- Plan of Development --- p.5 / Chapter 2 --- LITERATURE REVIEW --- p.7 / Chapter 2.1 --- Feedback on Writing --- p.8 / Chapter 2.1.1 --- Written Comments --- p.9 / Chapter 2.1.2 --- Spoken Feedback --- p.13 / Chapter 2.1.3 --- Writing Conferences / Chapter 2.2 --- Revisions --- p.20 / Chapter 2.2.1 --- Revisions: Definitions and Its Role --- p.20 / Chapter 2.2.2 --- The Development of Coding System in Revision Research --- p.24 / Chapter 2.3 --- Research Gap --- p.27 / Chapter 2.3.1 --- "Studies Based on Attitude, Perception and Impression" --- p.28 / Chapter 2.3.2 --- Studies Examining the Actual Discourse of Writing Conferences --- p.29 / Chapter 2.3.3 --- Studies Relating Conferences and Students' Revisions --- p.31 / Chapter 2.3.4 --- Studies Examining Second Language Learners --- p.32 / Chapter 2.3.5 --- Lack of Research Studies in EFL Contexts --- p.33 / Chapter 3 --- METHODOLOGY --- p.35 / Chapter 3.1 --- Settings --- p.35 / Chapter 3.2 --- Participants --- p.37 / Chapter 3.2.1 --- The Writing Tutors --- p.37 / Chapter 3.2.2 --- The Student Subjects --- p.38 / Chapter 3.3 --- Data Sources and Data Collection --- p.39 / Chapter 3.3.1 --- Questionnaires --- p.40 / Chapter 3.3.2 --- Writing Conference Interactions --- p.40 / Chapter 3.3.3 --- Tutors' Reports --- p.41 / Chapter 3.3.4 --- Students' Forms --- p.41 / Chapter 3.3.5 --- Students' Texts --- p.41 / Chapter 3.3.6 --- Interviews --- p.43 / Chapter 3.4 --- Data Analysis --- p.43 / Chapter 3.4.1 --- Conference Data Analysis --- p.44 / Chapter 3.4.2 --- Analysis of Revisions of Writings --- p.45 / Chapter 4 --- DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF WRITING CONFERENCES --- p.47 / Chapter 4.1 --- Introduction --- p.47 / Chapter 4.2 --- The Coding System --- p.48 / Chapter 4.2.1 --- Development of an Integrated Coding System for Writing Conference Interactions --- p.48 / Chapter 4.2.1.1 --- "Davis, Hayward, Hunter and Wallace (1989)" --- p.48 / Chapter 4.2.1.2 --- Sperling (1989) --- p.49 / Chapter 4.2.1.3 --- Newkirk (1995) --- p.50 / Chapter 4.2.1.4 --- Walker & Elias (1987) and Walker (1992) --- p.51 / Chapter 4.2.2 --- Application --- p.56 / Chapter 4.2.3 --- Evaluation --- p.61 / Chapter 4.3 --- An Overview of the Results and Findings --- p.61 / Chapter 4.4 --- The Structure of Writing Conferences in the EFL Context --- p.62 / Chapter 4.4.1 --- The Overall Structure --- p.62 / Chapter 4.4.2 --- Inform --- p.63 / Chapter 4.4.3 --- Elicitation --- p.67 / Chapter 4.4.4 --- Reread --- p.72 / Chapter 4.4.5 --- Elaboration --- p.74 / Chapter 4.4 --- The Function of Writing Conference Talk in the EFL Context --- p.76 / Chapter 4.5.1 --- The Higher Frequency Categories --- p.77 / Chapter 4.5.1.1 --- Marker --- p.78 / Chapter 4.5.1.2 --- Explanation --- p.81 / Chapter 4.5.1.3 --- Knowledge on Revision --- p.86 / Chapter 4.5.2 --- The Low Frequency Categories --- p.89 / Chapter 4.5.2.1 --- Preliminary --- p.89 / Chapter 4.5.2.2 --- Requests --- p.91 / Chapter 4.5.2.3 --- In-conference Revisions --- p.91 / Chapter 5 --- STUDENTS' REVISION BEHAVIOR --- p.93 / Chapter 5.1 --- Overview of Results and Findings --- p.93 / Chapter 5.2 --- Comparison Across the Papers --- p.96 / Chapter 5.3 --- Types of revisions --- p.99 / Chapter 5.3.1 --- Surface Changes --- p.100 / Chapter 5.3.2 --- Meaning Changes --- p.102 / Chapter 5.4 --- Types of revision operations --- p.106 / Chapter 5.4.1 --- The Most Frequently Employed Operation 一 Addition --- p.110 / Chapter 5.4.2 --- The Least Frequently Employed Operations --- p.113 / Chapter 6 --- THE LINK BETWEEN WRITING CONFERENCES AND REVISIONS --- p.119 / Chapter 6.1 --- Students' Revision Activities --- p.119 / Chapter 6.1.1 --- Revision that Can Be Traced back to Conferences --- p.119 / Chapter 6.1.2 --- Suggestions in Conferences that Did Not Result in Actual Revision --- p.121 / Chapter 6.1.3 --- Revision that Cannot Be Traced back to Conferences --- p.128 / Chapter 6.2 --- The Structure of the Successful Conferences --- p.132 / Chapter 6.2.1 --- Tutors' and Students' Talk --- p.133 / Chapter 6.2.2 --- The structural categories --- p.136 / Chapter 6.3 --- The Function of Conference Talk in the Successful Conferences --- p.137 / Chapter 7 --- CONCLUSION --- p.143 / Chapter 7.1 --- Discourse Analysis of EFL Writing Conferences --- p.144 / Chapter 7.1.1 --- Allocation of Talk --- p.144 / Chapter 7.1.2 --- The Focus of Writing Conferences --- p.145 / Chapter 7.2 --- Students Revising Processes and the Relationship with the Writing Conferences --- p.146 / Chapter 7.3 --- "Strengths, Weakness and Limitations of the Study" --- p.148 / Chapter 7.4 --- Implications and Recommendations --- p.151 / Chapter 7.5 --- Contribution to this Field --- p.151 / REFERENCES --- p.154 / APPENDICES --- p.161 / Appendix 1 Exempt Protocol For Using Human Subjects in Research --- p.162 / Appendix 2 Consent Form for Student Subjects --- p.166 / Appendix 3 Consent Form for Writing Tutors --- p.167 / Appendix 4 Transcripts of Writing Conferences --- p.168 / Appendix 5 Initial and Subsequent Drafts of Students' Writings --- p.273

Contempory writing theories do not explain many of the writing behaviors exhibited by basic writers in the classroom. Many theorists (Emig, Fitzgerald, Rose, and Perl) have identified similar and distinct writing behaviors which have also been identified by instructors of basic writers. This study focuses on two college-level basic writing students by using the results of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and identified writing behaviors of theorists; these case studies shed light on writing processes in relationship to personality. The results suggest a correlation between writing behaviors and personality types which affects the writing and the teaching of the writing processes. / Department of English

In recent years, many composition teachers and theorists have turned to the process approach to writing in an attempt to better understand both the act of writing and the writers themselves. Even though various theorists have made headway in the analysis of students' writing processes, further research is needed to explore whether college basic writers are aware of their own writing processes and whether this awareness can lead to discovery of the self as a writer and to diminished writing anxiety.One way for students to become aware of their composing processes is through process journals, in which they write about their actions in creating and revising their papers. Using process journals as an independent variable, this project studied differences among three groups of basic writers at Ball State University: those who wrote process journals frequently, infrequently, and not at all. I evaluated effects of process journals on self-reported awareness of process, as measured by a Writing Skills Questionnaire, and on writing apprehension, as measured by the Writing Apprehension Test (WAT). To measure changes among groups over two semesters, I analyzed students' questionnaire responses using mean scores and two Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) tests.Results showed that process journals did have a significant impact on students' attitudes about themselves as writers and on their awareness and control of writing processes. This study did not find, however, that process journals significantly decreased students' writing apprehension scores. In addition, it did not find Ball State University's basic writing students to be highly apprehensive writers. Although further research is needed to verify these results and expand the scope of research in process journals, the initial findings here suggest that process journals can be an important part of many students' writing experiences. / Department of English

A Faculty Orientation and Design for Writing Across the Curriculum is a case study of the work done to introduce the concept of writing across the curriculum at an urban community college. Emphasizing the related processes of learning, thinking, and writing, the researcher describes private interviews and analyzes transcriptions of small group meetings designed to discuss ways to encourage increased quantity and improved quality of writing in vocational and university-parallel courses on the campus. The focus of the study is the transcription of the faculty meetings where teachers reveal their methodologies and educational philosophies as they discuss ways to provide increased writing opportunities to large classes of open-door students. The culmination of the orientation project is a faculty booklet of ways to increase writing. The researcher concludes that although a writing "program" is not in place as a result of the year's work, essential groundwork for such a program is laid.

First year college writing classes originated in the United States at Harvard University in 1874. Since then, theorizing such a course has proven a place of contention, as its purposes and subjects have proven difficult to sort and impossible to agree upon. When Harvard first began teaching introductory composition, literature played an integral role in the course, both as subject matter and as a means of acculturation for an increasingly diverse student body. Since then, many universities have continued to use literature as an important component of what has remained the only course largely required of all first year students. However, the use of literature in introductory composition has been contested since such courses began. Conflicting ideals have typified the conversation concerning the role(s) of reading in writing classes, in large part because of how the discussion has been framed. The difficulty in framing in part stems from participants thus far addressing the issue in limiting ways. For example, some have claimed that the issue had already been resolved, while others have argued to separate the discussion of literature in first year writing from theoretical, institutional, and historical concerns, given contradictory accounts of that history, or denied it altogether. Re-examining that history demonstrates that the uses and purposes of literature in first year writing have been continually and critically implicated in issues far more complex than whether or not a poem appears in a writing class. Institutions subordinated composition to literature in English departments, which led first to writing departments turning to literature as a validating subject matter, then later rejecting it to assert the independence of writing as a discipline. Institutional and political struggles have clouded adequate theorization of reading and writing in first year classes as well. The discussion has sometimes treated both reading and writing unproblematically, and even recent efforts to introduce to the conversation multiple ways of writing have ignored related and multiple processes of reading. Rewriting a historical narrative of how literature has been used in first year writing that includes theoretical and institution concerns clarifies how those concerns underwrite more recent discussion. Bringing those concerns to the surface allows a richer theorizing of introductory composition and literature's role in it, particularly with the inclusion of recent challenges to the privileged nature of the category "literature." Transferring a prevalent model of writing as a cognitive, expressive, or social-cultural process to similarly identify reading processes offers one means by which we might reconfigure first year writing, inviting students to engage various ways of reading and writing. Addressing ways in which theoretical, institutional, and historical forces have shaped first year writing provides the means by which we might be more reflexive and critical in shaping such courses in the future. It also might allow the conversation of the role(s) of literature in composition to leave its 120 year stasis and take a progressive turn. / Graduation date: 1999

Presenting and synthesizing several paradigms for the teaching of literature in American colleges, I investigate how definitions of reading, readers, texts, interpretations, and knowledge affect student acts of reading and writing. In addition, I draw upon specific examples of text-based, reader-based, and social-cultural based models for the teaching of reading to demonstrate how particular pedagogical theories and practices emerge from and reflect larger ideological concepts and paradigms. Cognitive-oriented models of reading that rely upon schema theory to explain comprehension and interpretation, for example, have been used by theorists who advocated a text-based approach to literary analysis. Even though cognitive models are based on scientific studies that focus on the mental faculties of individual readers, I classify it as a text-based model because when translated into classroom practice, interpretive emphasis has been placed on the text rather than the reader. Therefore, the reader is subordinated to the text in various ways. Expressive and social-cultural theories presented by Louise Rosenblatt, Wolfgang Iser, Stanley Fish, and Kathleen McCormick are used to demonstrate how the rhetorical emphasis of interpretation can be shifted away from the text and toward the reader. As a reader-based theorist, for example, Rosenblatt advocates personal response as the most rewarding form of textual interaction students can experience. McCormick declares that personal response should be analyzed more extensively than the expressive model suggests, however. Hence, she proposes a social-based model that asserts both the cultures of reception and production should be studied as a means for better understanding individual responses to texts. But reading is not my only focus in this project. In each chapter, I extrapolate as to how theories of reading, when translated into classroom practice, affect both student writing and student participation in the making of meaning. Therefore, to enrich my theoretical discussions of pedagogy and its affects on students, I draw upon my experiences as both a teacher and a student to provide practical classroom examples of student acts of reading, interpretation, and writing. Moreover, the application chapters of this project present two extensive examples of how theory can be translated into practice-the first is a discussion of a recent composition course I taught, and the second is an example student paper that performs a McCormickean analysis of Zora Neale Hurston's Their Eyes Were Watching God. From theory to practice, then, this project presents and challenges what it means to be a teacher and a student of literature and composition. / Graduation date: 1997

Not available / text

Not available / text

The purpose of this study was to explore how Korean college students developed their English composition abilities based on their teacher's written comments on their class assignments. Drawing upon Vygotsky's (1978) socioconstructivist perspective on learning and Noddings' (1984) concept of care, I focused on the relationship between teacher and students and the effects of that relationship on the feedback and revision process. Participants included one non-native teacher of English and 14 students enrolled in a six-week summer English academic writing class in a Korean university in which the teacher employed the process writing approach to help students learn to write in English and the students were encouraged to revise their drafts from her written comments. Data were collected from formal, informal, and text-based interviews, class observations, and students' writing samples commented on by the teacher. In this study, the feedback and revision process was not portrayed as an intellectual activity involving only the teacher and each student, but as a social activity that involved a highly complex, dynamic, and interpersonal process. Despite various constraints and conditions, when the teacher committed herself to helping her students learn to write in English, the students generally responded to her with respect and appreciation. Particularly, her written comments allowed her and her students to meet as the one-caring and the cared-fors respectively. However, for caring to be developed and sustained, building trust in each other was a necessary condition, one that was problematic for some students. Three major contributions of the study include the following: (1) an expansion of Noddings' (1984) conception of caring to the English academic writing education in a foreign language context; (2) a re-envisionment of the cognitive process model of writing and revision in which the success of writing and revision was determined by students' knowledge and their intention in revision, now adding the role of the relationship between teacher and student; and (3) a new view of the feedback and revision process not as a product but as a frame within an EFL classroom. / text

The purpose of this case study was to examine the effectiveness of a technique known as re-creation on student writing abilities in ENG 104 section 95 during the spring semester of 1992. Re-creation, already used almost exclusively in England and Australia, invites a writer to divulge his or her personal interpretation of a literary text by rewriting given aspects of it. In section 95, the instructor devoted the entire range of assignments to re-creative writing tasks, using four dramatic scripts and the motion pictures that had been adapted from them as literary texts. The instructor carefully developed re-creative writing assignments and a reasonable criteria with which to grade them. He closely monitored how the students adapted to re-creative writing, and discovered that four students exemplified the main different styles of writing that emerged from re-creation. The case study does indicate that all of the twenty-one students coulddo the work that re-creation involves; some experienced only minor successes with it, but other students, including some top achievers who would probably have done well in any writing class, found broad new avenues for creative expression of their personal responses to literature. / Department of English