The Importance of Language
Diversity in ESL Writing Workgroups
By
Aseel Kanakri
The University of Akron
Aims of the Study



To examine the impact of language variation on
students’ writing skills in ESL writing workgroups.
To see if students learn better through peer
instruction or peer feedback when English is the only
means of communication.
To turn the language barrier into an incentive to
improve language fluency.
Theoretical Framework



A theory in second language literacy instruction
known as Task-Based Instruction (TBI) is used to
support the argument of this study.
TBI emphasizes student-centered instruction that
involves group work as opposed to teachercentered instruction.
The TBI approach will be more effective in ESL
classes if language variation is considered when
assigning groups to complete a task.
Study Subjects


The students included in this study are all
international students at a university in Northeast
Ohio taking an advanced ESL writing class in Spring
2012.
The section had 17 students. 8 of them were
Chinese (6 males and 2 females). There were also 7
Saudi students (4 males and 3 females). The rest
were one male Japanese student and one female
Taiwanese student.
Methodology

Writing Teachers’ Questionnaires

Class Observations

Group Writing Samples

Individual Writing Samples
The Teachers’ Responses






15 writing teachers were approached to fill out the
questionnaires. 8 of them filled out and returned the
questionnaires.
All 8 teachers who responded use workgroups.
3 of them use it twice a week, and the rest use it at
least once a week.
Groups usually have 3-4 students
First language, class performance, gender, and student
preferences are the main criteria reported for dividing
students into groups.
Each class has between 3 to 4 different languages.
The Teachers’ Responses Continued…


7 out of 8 teachers said that when all of the
students in the same group speak the same first
language , they tend to use their language instead
of English most of the times. One teacher reported
that this happens only on rare occasions.
All teachers strongly agree that this method of
dividing the students into groups based on
language variation benefits the students’ learning
of writing.
2. Classroom Observation
6 class meetings were observed over the course of a 7week quarter, and, in all of these classes, students worked in
groups. With the help of the teacher, the same group
members always worked together.
 There were four groups:
Group 1: Arabic speakers only (All Saudis 4 students)
Group 2: Chinese speakers only (All Chinese 4 students)
Group 3: Chinese and Arabic Speakers (3 Chinese, 1
Taiwanese, 1 Saudi)
Group 4: Chinese, Arabic and Japanese speakers (2 Saudis, 1
Chinese, and 1 Japanese)

Class Observation Analysis



Most students looked excited when divided into groups
The first group was active but their enthusiasm died out
quickly. They spoke about unrelated topics when the
teacher was not around. They used Arabic a lot.
The second group spoke too quietly and whispered to
one another in Chinese from time to time especially
when the teacher was not around. Electronic translators
were used a lot in this group too.
Class Observation Analysis Continued…


Group three were more active than the first two
groups, but not all of them were engaged enough in
the discussion or the writing. Chinese was used along
with electronic translators.
Group four looked the most active group. On rare
occasions first languages were used especially
towards the end of group time.
3. Writing Samples



6 writing samples were collected from each group.
Other samples of writing done individually were
collected from all of students to compare with their
writings within the group.
The analysis of the samples focuses on common ESL
writing problems such as idea development,
organization, spelling, verb forms, use of
prepositions, fragments, parallel structure, and
punctuation.
Analysis of Group Writing Samples
Groups with Same Language
Groups with Different Languages
•Less Organized
•Limited vocabulary
•Subject verb agreement errors
•Verb form mistakes
•(due to L1 interference)
•Punctuation, esp. with commas
•Mistakes in prepositions (due to literal
translation)
•Spelling mistakes
•Better organization
•Pretty good choice of vocabulary.
•Preposition mistakes
•Punctuation, esp. with commas
•Fewer spelling mistakes
Analysis of Individual Writing Samples
Common Problems in Individual Writing Samples
Repetition and redundancy
Weak argument and support
Many Chinese students have verb tense problems (L1 interference)
Many Arabic students have verb to-be and subject verb agreement problems (L1
interference
Literal translation and electronic translation (word choice + structure)
Parallel structure, fragments, and spelling mistakes.
Conclusions
1.
2.
3.
4.
When comparing group writing samples and individual samples, I noticed
that the individual writing samples don’t show so much differences
between the students. However, writings done in groups varied depending
on linguistic diversity.
When English is the only way to communicate with other members of the
group, students try to prove their English skills. They tend to spend more
time on editing and reviewing.
There is a similarity in the mistake patterns in the writings of the students
who come from the same country. This may be a result of cultural
background, L1 interference, or the educational system in their native
countries.
When groups include speakers of different languages, students tend to
correct each other’s mistakes. They feel more comfortable using English
and they take comments and other viewpoints more seriously.