Symposium on
Second
Language
Writing
The Future of Second
Language Writing
November 5-7, 2009
.
Arizona State University
Tempe, AZ
Symposium Chairs
Paul Kei Matsuda, Arizona State University
Tony Silva, Purdue University
Associate Chairs
Mark A. James, Arizona State University
Tanita Saenkhum, Arizona State University
Introduction
1
Dear Symposium Participants:
Welcome to the 2009 Symposium on Second Language Writing. As many of you know, the
Symposium began in 1998 as a way of bringing together internationally-recognized experts in
the field of second language writing to discuss key issues in the field. After a decade, the
Symposium has grown into an annual international gathering of teachers and researchers who
are working with second language writers in various capacities.
About a decade ago, Terry Santos organized a colloquium at the TESOL (Teachers of English to
Speakers of Other Languages) convention in New York to discuss the future of second language
writing, which was later published in the Journal of Second Language Writing. As the field of
second language writing continues to grow, it seems important to take stock of the developments
and accomplishments over the last decade and to reassess the challenges and opportunities that
lie ahead of us. This year’s Symposium, “The Future of Second Language Writing,” is designed
to help accomplish those goals.
This year’s Symposium features the following plenary speakers:
Carole Edelsky, Arizona State University (Emerita)
Mark A. James, Arizona State University
Ann M. Johns, San Diego State University (Emerita)
Gail Shuck, Boise State University
Mark D. Warschauer, University of California, Irvine
They represent different generations of second language specialists—those who have made
significant contributions over the course of their careers, those who have been leading the field
into the new era, and those who are rising stars in the field who represent emerging voices in the
field.
In addition, this year’s Symposium features invited colloquia that address a wide range of issues
related to the future of the field. They are:












“On the Future of Second Language Writing: 10 Years Later,” organized by Terry Santos
“The Future of Foreign Language Writing,” organized by Melinda Reichelt
“The Future of L2 Writing Assessment,” organized by Deborah Crusan
“Writing Through the Lens of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory,” organized by
Maria Estela Brisk
“Teaching and Learning of Writing in Asian School Contexts,” organized by Icy Lee
“L2 Writing in the Writing Center,” organized by Carol Severino
“The Future of Genre in L2 Writing,” organized by Christine Tardy
“Building Bridges between Second Language Writing and Teacher
Development/Education,” organized by Christina Ortmeier-Hooper
“Re-Examining ‘Generation 1.5,’” organized by Dana Ferris
“Technology and L2 Writing,” organized by Bryan Smith
“SLA and Second Language Writing,” organized by Rosa Manchón
“Institutionalizing L2 Writing,” organized by Paul Kei Matsuda
2 SSLW 2009
There also are a number of featured sessions, including ones featuring Bruce Horner and MinZhan Lu, Christine Pearson Casanave, and Stephanie Vandrick. On Thursday, there will be a
panel consisting of faculty members who teach in doctoral programs where students can develop
a specialization in second language writing. In addition, concurrent presentations will provide
opportunities to engage in conversations with presenters who represent various disciplinary,
methodological and geographic contexts.
The Symposium will also provide many opportunities—both formal and informal—to interact
with presenters as well as other second language writing specialists. We hope that you will be
able to not only learn something useful from the presenters, but also to share your perspectives
and insights as well as questions and concerns with other second language writing teachers and
researchers from various parts of the world.
We also hope that your stay in at Arizona State University is a comfortable and enjoyable one. If
you have any questions about this Symposium, Arizona State University, or Tempe and Greater
Phoenix, please feel free to ask any of the Symposium staff members who are wearing a
Symposium button.
We are grateful for the hard work of the members of the 2009 Symposium Organizing
Committee. Finally, we would like to extend our thanks and heartfelt welcome to the presenters
and session chairs as well as participants, who are here to make valuable contributions—
formally and informally—to the Symposium and to the development of the field of second
language writing.
Paul Kei Matsuda and Tony Silva, Founding Co-Chairs
Symposium on Second Language Writing
Acknowledgments
We are grateful to the following organizations and individuals:





Bedford/St. Martin's Press for sponsoring the Opening Reception and for providing
complimentary copies of Second-Language Writing in the Composition Classroom.
Assessing Writing and Elsevier for sponsoring the invited colloquium on writing
assessment, organized by Deborah Crusan and featuring Liz Hamp-Lyons, Sara
Cushing Weigle, Ed White, and Deborah Crusan.
Writing & Pedagogy and Equinox for sponsoring the invited colloquium on
technology and second language writing organized by Bryan Smith and featuring
Martha Pennington, Greg Kessler, Randi Reppen, Elena Cotos, and Bryan Smith.
Parlor Press and David Blakesley for sponsoring the plenary talk by Ann M. Johns.
Deborah Crusan for sponsoring two graduate student participants.
Without their generous contributions and support, this Symposium would not have been
possible.
Introduction
Symposium on Second Language Writing 2010
Crossing Disciplinary Boundaries
University of Murcia
Murcia, Spain
May 20-22, 2010
Call for Proposals
The 2010 Symposium Organizing Committee seeks proposals for 20-minute
presentations that address various topics within the field of L2 writing broadly
defined. Any topic related to second language writing theory, research, or teaching
is welcome. We particularly encourage proposals that seek to challenge the status
quo in the field by introducing new topics as well as new theoretical and
methodological approaches.
As with all previous nine Symposium iterations, we are interested in L2 writing
issues in any second or foreign language, at various levels of education, and in the
professions. Given the theme of the Symposium, we particularly encourage
proposals that connect L2 writing with other related areas of inquiry, such as
computer assisted instruction, second language acquisition, sociocultural theories,
linguistics, psychological and educational sciences, language testing, or rhetoric.
We welcome proposals from around the world.
To submit your proposal, please use the online proposal submission form available
at http://sslw.asu.edu/2010/. Proposals must include both an abstract (limited to
300 words) and a proposal summary (50 words).
Proposals must be received by 23:59:59 November 15th, 2009 (Spanish time).
Proposals will be peer reviewed by a panel of experts. Notification of acceptance
will be sent out by 20th December 2009.
We look forward to receiving your proposal!
Paul Kei Matsuda and Tony Silva, Chairs
Rosa Manchón, Local Chair
3
4 SSLW 2009
Table of Contents
Thursday, November 5
Workshop 1 (9 – 11:45) ...........................................................................................6
A Sessions (9-10:15)…………………………………………………………… ....6
B Sessions (10:30-11:45) .......................................................................................10
Workshop 2 (12:45-3:30) .......................................................................................14
C Sessions (12:45-2) ..............................................................................................14
D Sessions (2:15-3:30) ...........................................................................................19
E Sessions (3:45-5) ................................................................................................24
Opening Reception (5-7): Engrained Café ............................................................29
Friday, November 6
Plenary 1 (9-9:45): Ann Johns ...............................................................................31
F Colloquia (10-11:30) ..........................................................................................31
F Sessions (10-11:15) ............................................................................................32
G Colloquia (12:30-2) ............................................................................................34
G Sessions (12:30-1:45) .........................................................................................36
H Colloquia (2:15-3:45) .........................................................................................38
H Sessions (2:15-3:30) ...........................................................................................39
Plenary 2 (4-4:45): Mark Warschauer ...................................................................40
Special Reception (5-7): Engrained Café ..............................................................40
Saturday, November 7
Plenary 3 (9-9:45): Mark A. James ........................................................................41
I Colloquia (10-11:30) ...........................................................................................41
I Sessions (10-11:15) .............................................................................................42
J Colloquia (12:30-2) .............................................................................................44
J Sessions (12:30-1:45) ..........................................................................................46
K Colloquia (2:15-3:45) .........................................................................................48
K Sessions (2:15-3:30) ...........................................................................................49
Plenary 4 (4-4:45): Carole Edelsky and Gail Shuck ..............................................51
Closing Ceremony: (4:45-5): William Grabe ........................................................51
Publisher Exhibits
Bedford/St. Martin's Press
Cambridge University Press
Elsevier
Equinox
Heinle/Cengage Learning
Mouton de Gruyter
Parlor Press
Routledge
Southern Illinois University Press
University of Michigan Press
Introduction
5
6
SSLW 2009
Symposium Program
Thursday, November 5
Workshop I – Thursday, November 5, 9:00-11:45, Gold
Treatment of Error in Second Language Writing
Session Chair: Tanita Saenkhum, Yuching Jill Yang, Arizona State University, USA
Presenter: Dana Ferris, University of California, Davis, USA
Abstract: As most second language writing instructors know, the treatment of error,
variously known as “error correction,” “grammar correction,” or “written corrective
feedback,” has been a controversial topic for some years. Though researchers have
not resolved all of the questions surrounding this pedagogical issue, the field is
further along in its understanding than it was 15 years ago. Meanwhile, while
researchers stew and argue, most teachers in the trenches still provide some form of
feedback on errors to second language writers in their classes. This workshop will
begin with a review of the issues and their implications for teaching but will focus
most of its attention on the “how-tos”: what techniques, approaches, and principles
might teachers try (or have they tried), what seems to work (or not work) and why,
and what questions remain unresolved or at least under-explored? Extensive time will
be allowed for discussion and for practice/application activities that participants can
share in around the tables. This workshop is designed to be interactive and hands-on
and to allow participants to contribute their experiences, their questions, their
frustrations, and their concerns. While it is not quite a group therapy session for
frustrated and burned-out writing teachers, it should be stimulating, thoughtprovoking, and practical.
A Sessions – Thursday, November 5, 9:00-10:15
A.1 Thursday, November 5, 9:00-10:15, Yuma
Session Chair: Jiraporn Dhanarattigannon, Kasetsart University, Thailand
A.1.1 Politeness, Cuteness and Conflict: Cultural and Philosophical Identity Clashes
and Convergences for a Japanese Doctoral Student in Biophysics
Presenter: Marcia Buell, Northeastern Illinois University, USA
Abstract: Through textual analysis and interview data, this study explores how a
Japanese doctoral student studying biophysics in the United States challenged
discourse conventions in her ESL writing class and in a biophysics course, and how
the resulting textual hybridity indexed a complex interplay in her ways of knowing.
Introduction
7
A.1.2 White Prestige Ideology and Identity: ESL Composition Class as a Site of
Resistance and Accommodation
Presenter: Pei-hsun Emma Liu, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, USA
Abstract: This paper studies the role of identity and white prestige ideology as they
impact ESL writers’ resistance to teaching authority in composition classes. The
presenter qualitatively describes the process and factors forming oppositional
tendencies as well as resources and resistance strategies against dominant authority
employed by Taiwanese students in composition classes.
A.1.3 Stop Babying Me! Using Authentic and Challenging Popular Culture Texts to
Foster Proactive ESL Writers in the First-Year Composition Classroom
(CANCELLED)
Presenter: Ebru Erdem, Arizona State University, USA
Abstract: Authentic and challenging popular culture texts should be used in the ESL
first-year composition classroom, because they help students be more involved with
the cultural events surrounding them and with the written texts that are reflective of
these debates as well as the American writing traditions. Such engagement will lead
to self-sufficient and proactive ESL writers.
A.2 Thursday, November 5, 9:00-10:15, Pinal
Session Chair: Christina Ortmeier-Hooper, University of New Hampshire, USA
A.2.1 Intervening to Help in the Bilingual Elementary Classroom: ResearcherTeacher Collaboration for Developing Metacognitively-Strong ESL Writers
Presenters: Lawrence Jun Zhang, National Institute of Education, Nanyan
Technological University, Singapore
Donglan Zhang, National Institute of Education, Nanyan Technological
University, Singapore
Abstract: Developing metacognitively-strong ESL writers in elementary schools has
been highly regarded as an invaluable pedagogical goal in writing instruction. This
paper reports a study describing the processes/strategies for: i) ESL teacher
professional development; and ii) implementing a large-scale intervention project for
helping ESL writers in elementary classrooms. Implications for other contexts are
discussed.
A.2.2 Teaching Elementary Writing Within (Socio)Linguistic Spaces
Presenter: Deborah Horan, University of Texas at Austin, USA
Abstract: This paper presents findings from a sequential mixed methods study which
utilized survey (N=274) and case study (N=12) methodology to examine the ways in
which composition theories from applied linguistics could inform the teaching
practices and beliefs of elementary teachers across six states. Findings focus on
teaching English language learners.
8
SSLW 2009
A.2.3 Second Language Writing in New Mainstream Secondary Classrooms
Presenter: Kerry Enright, University of California, Davis, USA
Abstract: This paper examines “new mainstream” secondary classrooms as contexts
for L2 writing development across subjects and tracks. It also considers how the
presence of L2 writers in these classes influenced uses and roles of writing across the
curriculum. Implications suggest reconceptualizing “mainstream” to reshape practices
in teaching and research.
A.3 Thursday, November 5, 9:00-10:15, Yavapai
Session Chair: Anthony Adawu, University of Maryland, College Park, USA
A.3.1 Trained Peer Feedback: Low-Intermediate ESL Writers’ Revision Types
Presenter: Qi Zhang, University of South Florida, USA
Abstract: This study investigates low-intermediate ESL writers’ types of revisions
and progress in adopting peer written feedback in a naturalistic ESL reading/writing
classroom. The presenter talks about influence of peer feedback training, guided
response sheets, and teachers’ comment on reviewers’ feedback on students’
revisions, and the pedagogical implications of findings.
A.3.2 The Effect of Trained Peer Review on Argumentation and Fluency
(CANCELLED)
Presenter: Lilian Mina, Cairo University, Faculty of Engineering, Egypt
Abstract: In the university argumentative writing classroom, peer review has been
perceived as a way of improving students’ writing. This paper shows that trained peer
review can improve students’ argumentative skills. The presenter will introduce new
instruments, describe them and show how they can help in this regard.
A.3.3 Assessing the Impact of Cognitive and Metacognitive Strategy Use on
Performance on Three Academic Writing Tasks
Presenters: Robert Edwards, University of Sherbrooke, Canada
Françoise Bleys, University of Sherbrooke, Canada
Abstract: Part of a larger test development project aimed at providing a battery of
diagnostic tests for students applying to undertake university studies in their second
language, this paper presents a study of the effect of test taker control over a number
of cognitive and metacognitive strategies on the completion of academic writing
tasks.
A.5 Thursday, November 5, 9:00-10:15, Coconino
Session Chair: Anita Chaudhuri, Arizona State University, USA
A.5.1 Course Labels and Identities: A Study of Second Language Writing Classrooms
Presenter: Anita Chaudhuri, Arizona State University, USA
Abstract: The proposed study questions the usefulness of varied linguistic labels for
first year composition courses that – (i) L2 learners are unfamiliar with, (ii) have
negative connotations, (iii) do not match their abilities, and (iv) may conflict with
Introduction
9
their identities. It also considers what role linguistic labels play in placement
practices.
A.5.2 Discourse Patterns in G1.5 Student Writing: A Corpus-Based Comparison
Presenter: Mary Connerty, Penn State Erie, The Behrend College, USA
Abstract: This presentation will focus on results of a corpus linguistic study
analyzing salient semantic and lexico-grammatical features in G1.5 student essays as
compared to traditional ESL and NES student writing. Results indicate that G1.5
students show marked discourse features in their writing, different from the other
student groups.
A.5.3 The Relationship Between Advance Planning and ESL Writing
Presenter: Mark Johnson, Northern Arizona University, USA
Abstract: Students’ writing plans were examined to determine features of planning
associated with writing quality. Results indicated significant relationships between
several planning features and components of teachers’ evaluation of students’ writing.
The findings suggest that explicit instruction in planning positively influences
students’ writing.
A.6 Thursday, November 5, 9:00-10:15, Apache
Session Chair: Kathryn Aguilar-Trejo, Arizona State University, USA
A.6.1 Lexical Bundles in Second Language Writing (CANCELLED)
Presenters: Myung Hye Huh, Korea University, Korea
Seonghee Choi, Kyonggi Institute of Technology, Korea
Abstract: This study analyzes a corpus of second language (L2) writing to identify
four-word lexical bundles used by college students. Specifically, this study provides
structural analyses of four-word bundles identified in the corpus of L2 writing as well
as an analysis of the functions performed by these bundles with the examples of their
use in context.
A.6.2 Lost for Words? The Strategic Use of the L1 in Lexical Searches in L2
Composing
Presenters: Liz Murphy, Universidad de Murcia, Spain
Julio Roca de Larios, Universidad de Murcia, Spain
Abstract: This study explored the strategic use of the L1 by an advanced group of
Spanish EFL learners solving lexical problems in two different tasks. We analyzed
the effect of task difficulty on the number and type of lexical problems tackled and
categorized the purposes for which the L1 was used.
A.6.3 Faculty Expectations of Writing in Content-Area Classes
Presenter: Nur Yigitoglu, Georgia State University, USA
Abstract: This study investigates specifics of assignments in writing assignments in
content-area classes at a large U.S. university and examines requirements and faculty
expectations in writing assignments given across curriculum. The intent is to inform
10 SSLW 2009
ESL teachers on how to best prepare students for writing assignments at U.S
A.7 Featured Session:Thursday, November 5, 9:00-10:15, Navajo
Session Chair: Ryan Skinnell, Arizona State University, USA
Teaching Towards Diversalité in English: Putting English in Translation
Presenters: Bruce Horner, University of Louisville, USA
Min-Zhan Lu, University of Louisville, USA
Abstract: The presenters will use recent scholarship on ELF communication
(Canagarajah, Higgins, House, Rubdi and Saraceni, Sifakis) to argue for, and
identify principles of, English writing pedagogy aimed at directly countering
students’ and teachers’ monolingualist dispositions. We describe strategies by
which, alternatively, English writing instruction can develop dispositions
embracing diversalité (Confiant) by treating English as always already “in
translation” (Pennycook).
universities.
B Sessions – Thursday, November 5, 10:30-11:45
B.1 Thursday, November 5, 10:30-11:45, Yuma
Session Chair: Brian Guthrie, Purdue University, USA
B.1.1 Writing Collaboratively: a Peek into the Complexity of Molding a Single Text
Presenter: Joan Valenzuela, Universiti Teknologi Petronas, Malaysia
Abstract: This case study paints a vivid picture of the scenes unfolding within a
group of novice writers in English as they attempt to compose a single text. It probes
the identity negotiation and power relations that naturally occur in collaborative
writing and present implications for second language writing teaching practices.
B.1.2 Using Ethnography to Teach English Academic Writing in China
Presenter: Kyle McIntosh, Purdue University, USA
Abstract: This paper highlights the rewards and challenges of using ethnographic
practices such as observation, conversation, and documentation to help undergraduate
English students at a Chinese university develop better planning, research, and overall
academic writing skills, as well as provide insight into the beliefs and practices of
other “small” cultures.
B.1.3 Nurturing Independent Writers in an Introductory Composition Course for
International Students: A Case Study of Multimodal Learning Environments,
Course Outcomes, and Student Self-Assessment
Presenters: Elena Lawrick, Purdue University, USA
Fatima Esseili, Purdue University, USA
Abstract: This presentation reports on a one-semester case study of instruction in an
introductory composition course for international students. Findings show that
Introduction
11
multiple modes of instruction and teacher’s familiarity with rhetorical and textual
features of World Englishes create confident and independent writers capable of
making informed, effective rhetorical and linguistic choices.
B.2 Thursday, November 5, 10:30-11:45, Pinal
Session Chair: Tony Cimasko, Miami University, USA
B.2.1 Learning What to Look for: Genre in First Year EAP
Presenter: Hyunju Lee, The Ohio State University, USA
Abstract: This presentation will describe genre learning in first year graduate-level
EAP classes. The cases reveal what aspects of genre writing were initially visible to
the students, what were not, and how they progressed from there. By showing the rich
and complex nature of learning genre, the study gives much needed insight for
ESP/EAP writing instruction (Cheng, 2006).
B.2.2 Core and Periphery: Opportunities for Innovation by L2 Writers in a
Disciplinary Genre
Presenter: Tony Cimasko, Miami University, USA
Abstract: Engaging with established discourse norms, L2 writers may also find
opportunities to successfully incorporate features from their home languages into
research papers. Instances of successful use of L1 in L2 writing can help identify
where adherence to norms is required in research writing, and where writer
innovation is possible.
B.2.3 Exploring Genres and Mediated Actions in EFL Students’ Blog Writing
Presenter: Ching-Fen Chang, National Chiao Tung University, Taiwan
Abstract: The paper reports a case study examining 30 Taiwanese college students’
blog writing from genre analysis and Activity theory. Data were collected from
students’ blogs, a questionnaire, and an interview. The results showed that their
English proficiency and the situated factors highly affected their blog writing.
B.3 Thursday, November 5, 10:30-11:45, Yavapai
Session Chair: Flurije Salihu, Arizona State University, USA
B.3.1 Powers: Peer Online Writing EFL Reviewers
Presenter: Christine Rosalia, New York University, USA
Abstract: This presentation examines the benefits that EFL peer reviewers received
when they gave feedback on academic writing in a peer online writing center. A
mixed-method approach compares how electronic advice co-construction improved
POWERS’ persuasive writing proficiency, self-regulation and the quality of the
feedback they gave over a comparison group.
B.3.2 Comparing Type of Feedback and Processing Mode: Pair Versus Individual
Processing of Feedback on Writing
Presenter: Neomy Storch, University of Melbourne, Australia
Abstract: Our study investigated the effect of type of feedback (reformulations
versus editing symbols) and how feedback is processed (individually versus in pairs)
12 SSLW 2009
on learners’ writing. Our findings suggest that pair processing of feedback promotes
greater accuracy in the long term and when the feedback is in the form of
reformulations.
B.3.3 Writing Together for the Future
Presenters: Kyung-Hee Bae, University of Houston, USA
Bobbie Chun, University of Houston, USA
Abstract: Using results from pre- and post- course surveys and objective assessment,
the presentation discusses the effects of using near-peer tutors in collaborative work
in a discipline-specific writing course. Preliminary results suggest that utilizing nearpeers may empower L2 writers to engage critically in their chosen discourse
community and become successful members.
B.4 Thursday, November 5, 10:30-11:45, Santa Cruz
Session Chair: Melinda Reichelt, University of Toledo, USA
B.4.1 A Comparative Study of ESL and EFL University Students’ Writing Goals
Presenter: Florentina Nicolás Conesa, Murcia University, Spain
Abstract: This paper presents a study about writing goals of University EFL students
with a view to comparing them to the goals reported in ESL contexts. Data collection
and analysis base on the protocols and operationalisation of ESL studies. Our findings
may be relevant from a theoretical and pedagogical standpoint.
B.4.2 The Influence of Study Abroad Periods on EFL Writing Processes and Products
Presenter: Sonia Lopez-Serrano, Murcia University, Spain
Abstract: This study explored the influence of study abroad and at home learning
contexts on EFL students’ L2 writing processes and products. Results indicate that
the development of writing competence is more dependent on how students learn to
write and what type of writing practice they engage in than on the learning context
itself.
B.4.3 Between Englishes: Chinese Students Preparing to Study in North America &
What They Want from Writing Instruction
Presenter: Joel Hartse, University of British Columbia, Canada
Abstract: This qualitative project seeks understand what Chinese college students
who plan to go on to graduate studies in North America want from English writing
instruction in China. It consists of data gathered at a major university in China, and
offers an analysis of these student perspectives from a World Englishes framework.
B.5 Thursday, November 5, 10:30-11:45, Coconino
Session Chair: Rachel Reed, Auburn University, USA
B.5.1 Towards a Better—and More Useful—Understanding of English Articles via
Corpus Analysis
Presenter: Heather Robinson, York College/City University of New York, USA
Abstract: This presentation explores the semantics of English’s system of
definiteness, using the American National Corpus of spoken and written texts. In
Introduction
13
addition to providing a more detailed understanding of the English article system in
speech and writing, I also explore the pedagogical implications and usefulness of this
type of analysis.
B.5.2 An Investigation of Metaphors in L2 Writing: A Corpus-Based Approach
Presenter: Lingxia Jin, University of Arizona, USA
Abstract: The study aims to test the metaphor theory proposed by Lakoff and
Johnson (1980) by using a learner corpus and a native English speaker corpus. Two
most frequent verbs in the learner corpus are examined: MAKE and GET. The study
sheds light on how learners express abstract concepts in L2 writing.
B.5.3 Linguistic Features and Writing Quality of EFL Essays
Presenter: Masumi Narita, Tokyo International University, Japan
Abstract: The relationship between twelve linguistic features and L2 writing quality
was investigated. The linguistic features were selected from developmental indices in
fluency, complexity, and accuracy measures of L2 text. Positive predictors of L2
writing quality were text length, average sentence length, and Guiraud index as a
lexical diversity measure.
B.6 Featured Session:Thursday, November 5, 10:30-11:45, Apache
Session Chair: Ann Corney, Elsevier Ltd.
How to Write for Academic Journals
Presenters: Liz Hamp-Lyons, Assessing Writing, Journal of English for Academic
Purposes
Ilona Leki, Journal of Second Language Writing
Rosa Manchon, Journal of Second Language Writing
Abstract: This Publishing Workshop aims to provide guidance and insights on
how to get published in academic, peer reviewed journals. It will also address the
peer-review process and provide an opportunity for a question and answer session
with the journal Editors of Journal of Second Language Writing, Assessing Writing
and Journal of English for Academic Purposes.
B.7 Thursday, November 5, 10:30-11:45, Navajo
Session Chair: Gail Steele, Universiti Teknologi Petronas Malaysia
B.7.1 EFL Versus L1 Writing Instruction in Brazil: Convergences and Divergences
Presenter: Isabela Villas Boas, Casa Thomas Jefferson, Brazil
Abstract: This paper describes an educational ethnography with teenage
intermediate-level learners in an ELT Institution in Brazil. The goal was to document
and analyze the learners’ writing development in a social-interactional and processoriented approach, and compare it to these learners’ writing instruction in their native
language, in their various regular schools.
14 SSLW 2009
B.7.2 Comparing Content and Organization in L1 and L2 Academic Writing:
Statistical Evidence from One Colombian University
Presenters: Diana Cuervo Escobar, Universidad de los Andes, Colombia
Gerriet Janssen, Universidad de los Andes, Colombia
Abstract: Using Jacob’s 1981 analytic rubric and the Michigan Writing Assessment
Scoring Guide, this investigation presents new statistical evidence comparing
perceived problems in student writing in Spanish and English (L1= Spanish),
evaluating both organizational features and development of content. Similar results
are projected for the languages according to these two features.
Workshop II – Thursday, November 5, 12:45-3:30, Gold
Plagiarism vs. Legitimate Textual Borrowing
Session Chair: Matt Hammill, Yuching Jill Yang, Arizona State University, USA
Presenter: Christine Tardy, DePaul University, USA
Abstract: Issues of plagiarism continue to provoke discussion among writing
teachers and researchers, and they pose particular questions for second language
writing professionals. How can teachers distinguish transgressional acts of copying
from legitimate (and developmentally important) acts of textual borrowing? Perhaps
more importantly, how can we help students make these distinctions? In this
workshop, we will probe the murky middle ground between plagiarism and textual
borrowing through interactive discussions and activities. Participants will share and
develop an array of activities for helping students to develop effective strategies for
borrowing. We will also examine a multi-step writing assignment that introduces
formal citation conventions, practices effective borrowing skills, and draws on the
cultural and linguistic strengths of multilingual writers.
C Sessions – Thursday, November 5, 12:45-2:00
C.1 Thursday, November 5, 12:45-2:00, Yuma
Session Chair: Mary Connerty, Penn State Erie, The Behrend College, USA
C.1.1 Negotiating Assessment in the L2 and Generation 1.5 Classroom Through the
Use of Student-Generated Grading Rubrics
Presenter: Andrew Golden, Florida International University, USA
Abstract: Student-generated grading rubrics bridge the gap between Universal
Design and programmatic learning outcomes. These rubrics provide a forum where
expectations about writing are negotiated. Leading students toward meta-cognition as
they articulate writing goals, rubrics help students assume greater ownership of their
text. Most importantly, students believe instructors will more fairly assess their
writing.
Introduction
15
C.1.2 International and US-Educated L2 Writers Attending to Features of Language
and Writing in Oral Conferences
Presenter: Sarah Nakamaru, Borough of Manhattan Community College, USA
Abstract: This presentation analyzes oral feedback addressing six features of
language or writing: rhetorical, lexical, grammatical, phonological, orthographical,
and academic skills/conventions. The presenter discusses the relative attention paid to
each of these features in writing center tutorials with two international and two USeducated multilingual writers. Profiles of each writer are presented.
C.1.3 Generation 1.5 Students and Linguistic Patterns in Their Writing
Presenter: Stephen Doolan, Northern Arizona University, USA
Abstract: This presentation is a second exploratory analysis with new data and
adjusted methodology, following-up on a study presented at AAAL, 2009. This
presentation establishes a rationale for identifying Generation 1.5 students for
research purposes and analyzes their writing samples for linguistic patterns (e.g.
errors, prepositional phrases) found in their writing.
C.2 Thursday, November 5, 12:45-2:00, Pinal
Session Chair: Judith Hertog, Dartmouth College, USA
C.2.1 Analyzing Voice in Two Languages: A Case Study
Presenter: Barbara Pamela Olmos Lopez, Benemerita Universidad Autonoma de
Puebla, Mexico
Abstract: Finding one’s academic voice is difficult, especially when writing in a
foreign language. This presentation reports on the analysis and comparison of a
writer’s voice expression in two languages supporting the claim that L1 culture
influences L2 writing. The implications of this finding for teaching L2 writing are
also discussed.
C.2.2 Minor Hybridized Rhetorics: Challenging Essentialist Notions of Identity from
the L2 Writing Classroom
Presenter: Ana Milena Ribero, DePaul University, USA
Abstract: This presentation examines the role of “minor” hybridized rhetorics in
destabilizing hegemonic systems of exclusion. The presenter shares tools for
encouraging hybridized rhetorics in second language writing classrooms and
strategies for transforming pedagogies to adopt nonbinary definitions of identity.
C.2.3 Young Children’s Interpretation of EFL Writing
Presenter: Yueh-Hung Tseng, National Dong-Hwa University, Taiwan
Abstract: This study uses a social perspective to investigate the process by which
children who are beginners in EFL learning interpreted English writing in a functional
learning context created by the author as a teacher-researcher. This study found that
learners interpreted English writing as resources, specific knowledge of the given
community, and power changed their positions.
16 SSLW 2009
C.3 Thursday, November 5, 12:45-2:00, Yavapai
Session Chair: Steve Simpson, University of New Hampshire, USA
C.3.1 Incorporation of Service Learning in College English: Impacts on L2 Writers’
Invention Process
Presenter: Yichun Liu, National Chengchi University, Taiwan
Abstract: To encourage students to situate their writing texts in real contexts, S-L
method is incorporated into a L2 writing course curriculum in Taiwan. This study
aims to research the impacts of S-L on writers’ invention of writing and attempts to
answer the following research questions: 1. What are the advantages/disadvantages of
S-L on L2 writers’ invention? 2. Does S-L have varied impacts on students’ invention
in different writing modes?
C.3.2 Concept-Based Instruction and Second Language Writing: Theory and Practice
Presenter: Neil Johnson, University of Aizu, Japan
Abstract: Concept-based instruction, based upon a sociocultural theory of mind, has
recently gained attention in applied linguistics and second language academic writing
specifically. In this presentation, I describe the theoretical framework, present
classroom materials, and offer analysis of spoken peer interaction and written texts.
Implications for second language writing pedagogy are discussed.
C.3.3 Email Dialogue in Task-Based L2 Writing Classroom: Writers’ Rhetorical
Awareness and Language Development
Presenter: Sachiko Yasuda, University of Hawaii at Manoa, USA
Abstract: This study examined how Japanese EFL undergraduate students develop
their rhetorical awareness and language ability via email dialogue in the 15-week
task-based writing course. Results showed that the course helped the students to use a
wider variety of linguistic and rhetorical choices to interact with the instructor.
Moreover, the students exhibited an ability to differentiate registers, depending on the
rhetorical context.
C.4 Thursday, November 5, 12:45-2:00, Santa Cruz
Session Chair: Jay Jordan, University of Utah, USA
C.4.1 The Effectiveness of Checklists for Connecting Reading and Writing in an EFL
Writing Course
Presenter: Fumiko Yoshimura, Tohoku Gakuin University, Japan
Abstract: This presentation reports on the effectiveness of checklists for connecting
reading and writing in an EFL writing course. Two checklists for reading model texts
and students’ own drafts were created and implemented in the course. One semester’s
instruction changed students’ reading and writing behavior and improved their
writing performance.
Introduction
17
C.4.2 The Relationship Between Writing and Speaking: An Effect of Pre-Task
Planning
Presenter: Hiep Chau, Michigan State University, USA
Abstract: For further empirical evidence of the writing-speaking connection, this
study investigated whether L2 learners can carry over what they write during pre-task
planning into speaking. The findings revealed significant correlations of the learners’
writing and speaking in terms of complexity and accuracy, but not fluency.
C.4.3 Silence and Listening as L2 Rhetorical Arts (CANCELLED)
Presenter: Jay Jordan, University of Utah, USA
Abstract: While native-English-speaking students and instructors may attribute L2
students' silences to misunderstanding or underconfidence, my research reveals a
range of reasons for silence. I draw on scholarly work on the rhetorical value of
silence and listening to reframe L2 students' participation in many US-based writing
courses.
C.5 Thursday, November 5, 12:45-2:00, Coconino
Session Chair: Bonnie Quinn, Arizona State University, USA
C.5.1 Second Language Feedback and Revision Research: Where Do We Go from
“Here”?
Presenter: Lynn Goldstein, The Monterey Institute of International Studies, USA
Abstract: This presentation will argue for and describe an L2 research agenda that
allows for an understanding of feedback and revision processes using research
methodologies that will allow us to soundly address the complex and situated nature
of L2 feedback and revision.
C.5.2 Feedback in L2 Writing: Synthesizing Synthesized Research
Presenter: Elena Poltavtchenko, Northern Arizona University, USA
Abstract: Whether feedback is beneficial to L2 writers has been a subject of debate
for over a decade. The present study compares several meta-analyses and synthesis
papers on the role of feedback in L2 writing, analyzes the decisions that authors of
such papers are facing, and provides recommendations for future research.
C.5.3 Who Gives Feedback to Multilingual Writers?
Presenter: Elisabeth Kramer, University of New Hampshire, USA
Abstract: Who sponsors feedback and revision in the ESOL writing classroom? This
case study explores sponsorship of writing and response both in and outside of the
composition classroom. Implications from this study suggest ways to integrate
multiple sponsors of response and revision into a resource-rich reserve from which
students can draw.
18 SSLW 2009
C.6 Thursday, November 5, 12:45-2:00, Apache
Session Chair: Tony Silva, Purdue University
C.6.1 A Genre Analysis of Essay and Letter Writing in the FL College Literature
Classroom (CANCELLED)
Presenter: Cori Crane, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA
Abstract: This paper presents a genre analysis of two common text types found in
college-level FL programs: academic essays and personal letters. Texts written by 12
advanced L2 learners enrolled in an introductory German literature course are
analyzed to show the preferred lexico-grammatical choices L2 writers make across
the two genres.
C.6.2 Exploring the Activity of Writing: a Cross-Case Study of Two College Foreign
Language Classes
Presenters: Adrian Reynolds, The Ohio State University, USA
Ming Fang, The Ohio State University, USA
Yunyan Zhang, The Ohio State University, USA
Abstract: We attempt to explore the activity of writing in two college-level FLW
classes (Spanish and Chinese) at a large Mid-western university in the U.S. Through
comparative analysis, we examine how both teachers and students co-construct and
perceive the activity of writing as a sociocultural, cognitive, and textual activity.
C.6.3 Promoting FL Collaborative Writing Though the Use of Web 2.0 Tools
Presenter: Idoia Elola, Texas Tech University, USA
Abstract: This study examines the benefits of combining wikis and chats for FL
collaborative writing regarding accuracy, fluency, complexity, content and structure.
The analysis of the essays, drafts in the wikis, chats and questionnaires provide
significant information about students’ negotiations and awareness about aspects of
FL writing.
C.7 Thursday, November 5, 12:45-2:00, Navajo
Session Chair: M. Sidury Christiansen, The Ohio State University, USA
C.7.1 The Interrelationship Between L1 Writing, L2 Writing and L2 Proficiency in
Narrative and Argumentative Essays: a Case of Chinese Graduate Students in
the U.S.
Presenter: Hsin-I Chen, University of Arizona, USA
Abstract: This study examines the interrelationship between L1 writing, L2 writing
and L2 proficiency among 24 Chinese graduate students in the U.S in both narrative
and argumentative writing. A difference is identified across two genres. The findings
indicate that instruction, discipline, and length of stay in U.S. affect L2 writing
competence development.
Introduction
19
C.7.2 The Effect of Protocol-Aided Revision Training on Korean College Students’
Argumentative Writing in English
Presenter: Yeon Hee Choi, Ewha Womans University, Korea
Abstract: The present study aims at developing a revision training model for Korean
college students’ writing in English, based on the results of analyzing the effects of
protocol-aided revision training compared with those of revision utilizing teacher
feedback and the improvement in writing quality.
C.7.3 L1 Transfer in the Writings of Chinese EFL Learners: A Comparison of L1 and
L2 Descriptive Papers
Presenter: Xiaoling Ji, Shanghai Normal University, China
Abstract: The present study aims to examine how the writing of Chinese descriptive
essays influences that of English descriptive papers. 14 pairs of descriptive papers are
compared in the aspects of presence/absence of and location of thesis statement, topic
sentence, and paragraph unity. Preliminary data analysis suggests that Chinese
writing is not necessarily less logic.
D Sessions – Thursday, November 5, 2:15-3:30
D.1 Thursday, November 5, 2:15-3:30, Yuma
Session Chair: Todd Ruecker, University of Texas at El Paso, USA
D.1.1 Pedagogy 2.0: Cross-Cultural Composition Courses in the 21St Century’s
Glocalized World
Presenter: Marohang Limbu, University of Texas El Paso, Texas, USA
Abstract: Traditional composition course is hegemonic, ideological, and political
since it marginalizes ESL and EFL students from composition courses culturally and
linguistically. Now, we have to deconstruct the old hegemonic composition course
and reconstruct pedagogy 2.0 oriented composition course that validates peripheral
student’s cultural materials, prior academic knowledge, and individual experiences.
D.1.2 Authenticity in the Composition Classroom: Literacy and the Global Voice
Presenter: Michelle Steil, Northeastern Illinois University, USA
Abstract: Through close examination of student essays on texts in translation
covering topics such as families, social groups, and global politics, the presenter
argues that the notion of a linguistics approach to global Englishes in the
Composition classroom is specious, and presents a new approach to authenticity
through global voice.
20 SSLW 2009
D.2 Thursday, November 5, 2:15-3:30, Pinal
Session Chair: Christine Pearson Casanave, Temple University Japan
D.2.1 Credibility, Identity, and Values: Personal Narratives on Electronic Bulletin
Boards in China and Japan
Presenter: Xiaoye You, Penn State University, USA
Abstract: Focusing on personal narratives posted on electronic bulletin boards, I
compare and contrast how Chinese and Japanese narrators interact with respondents
to negotiate their credibility, identity, and values through English. The study sheds
light on how non-native speakers of English perform situated learning and produce,
circulate, and consume local knowledge.
D.2.2 Negotiating Identity from Autoethnography: Second Language Writers’
Perspectives
Presenter: Pisarn Chamcharatsri, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, USA
Abstract: The purpose of this presentation is to illustrate the use of autoethnography
in second language (L2) writing classroom and how it essentializes L2
writers/learners’ background and their identities. Autoethnography, for L2 learners, is
a valuable task that allows them to value and essentialize their own cultural
background and identities.
D.2.3 Composing Lives: Bilingual Literacy Autobiographies of University Freshmen
Presenter: Kai-lin Wu, Tunghai University, Taiwan
Abstract: This presentation first describes a process-based approach to incorporating
bilingual literacy autobiographies into a first-year college English composition
classroom in Taiwan and then explores the development of students as writers in
Chinese and English. Pedagogical implications for second language writing will also
be discussed.
D.3 Thursday, November 5, 2:15-3:30, Yavapai
Session Chair: Sachiko Yasuda, University of Hawai‘i, USA
D.3.1 L1 Involvement in L2 Writing: Which Way Works Better? Translation vs.
Direct L2 Writing
Presenter: Jing Xia, Arizona State University, USA
Abstract: This study investigates the effect of L1 involvement in L2 writing. Results
suggested that L1 plays a decisive role in predicting writers’ L2 text quality, and the
effect L1 involvement casts on L2 writing is dependent on writers’ L2 language
proficiency.
D.3.2 Pre-Service Teachers’ Written Communication of Math Understanding in a
Second Language: What re the Language Demands?
Presenter: Alberto Esquinca, University of Texas at El Paso, USA
Abstract: This is a study of L2 writers in a mathematics class emphasizing math
communication. Data was gathered from participant-observation, study sessions,
written assignments, and interviews with the three participating pre-service teachers.
Introduction
21
Without explicit guidance, participants made use of English knowledge, math
content, school math genres, and writing models.
D.3.3 Writing for Publication in Peripheral Countries: A Case Study of Taiwanese
Multilingual Scholars
Presenter: Yi-hui CHIU, National Taipei College of Business, Taiwan
Abstract: Little is known about how non-Anglophone science scholars struggle to
write for scholarly publication in English. Drawing on Lave and Wenger’s (1991)
concept of legitimate peripheral participation, this study will report on how the
locally-trained emerging science professionals enculturate into the academic
community in Taiwan.
D.4 Thursday, November 5, 2:15-3:30, Santa Cruz
Session Chair: Erik Johnson, Arizona State University, USA
D.4.1 Tracing a Process of Learning to Write a Research Paper: Proposing a Genre
Knowledge Domains (CANCELLED)
Presenter: Hyechong Park, Ohio State University, USA
Abstract: By mainly employing spoken discourse analysis among four
undergraduates in and out-of-classroom settings for two academic quarters, this paper
proposes a model of four meta-domains of genre knowledge required to write a
humanities research paper at the undergraduate level: information literacy, language
use, subject knowledge, and writing skills.
D.4.2 Prestige Writing in Biology: Investigating Stance in High and Low Impact
Journals
Presenter: Rachel Koch, Northern Arizona University, USA
Abstract: This paper investigates persuasion in biology journals. Articles (n=38)
from high and low and low inpact journals were analyzed in terms of the occurrence
of stance modals. Findings indicate that stance modals are more common in high
impact journals and are discussed in terms of pedagogical implications.
D.4.3 Success in Thesis Writing: An L2 English Writer’s Participation in a Research
“Community of Practice”
Presenter: Mayumi Fujioka, Kinki University, Japan
Abstract: Situated in the “Community of Practice” (CoP) framework, this study
explores a Japanese student’s master’s level disciplinary literacy development. The
interview and written data indicate that the student’s intellectual and social
participation in a research CoP with multiple experts and peers led him to successful
thesis writing in English.
22 SSLW 2009
D.5 Thursday, November 5, 2:15-3:30, Coconino
Session Chair: Yichun Liu, National Chengchi University, Taiwan
D.5.1 Investigating Preservice and Experienced ESL Writing Teachers’ Written
Feedback Practices and Beliefs
Presenter: Seongmee Ahn, Michigan State University, USA
Abstract: This study investigates if and how teaching experience influences written
teacher feedback techniques and beliefs. Do the amount and type of written teacher
feedback differ depending on teaching experience? Are there similarities and
differences in teachers’ beliefs and reflections on their written feedback among
teachers of different levels of experience?
D.5.2 Students’ Journey Through Written Feedback
Presenter: Emel Çağlar, Istanbul Technical University, Turkey
Abstract: This paper reports on a study which was designed to identify the nature
and source of students’ difficulties in interpreting and utilizing feedback on their
writing, to investigate how students cope with these difficulties, and to what extent
the students’ drafts correlate with the teacher’s actual comments.
D.6 Thursday, November 5, 2:15-3:30, Apache
Session Chair: Kagnarith Chea, Arizona State University, USA
D.6.1 “I Want My Leo and Babelfish”: FL-Learners of German and Online Resources
Presenter: Julie Larson-Guenette, University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA
Abstract: This study investigated ways in which university learners of German use
online resources and more specifically when writing in German. Data consists of
open-ended surveys (n=71) and face-to-face interviews (n=13). Results reveal how
and why these learners use online resources along with pedagogical implications for
the foreign language classroom.
D.6.2 Academic Literacy in Spanish University EFL Writing
Presenters: JoAnne Neff, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain
Caroline Bunce, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain
Emma Dafouz, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain
Juan Pedro Rica, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain
Marta Genís, Universidad de Antonio Nebrija, Spain
Anne McCabe, Saint Louis University, Spain
Abstract: This paper presents the conclusions drawn from several 37-hour courses in
academic writing (AW) instruction for Spanish university EFL students. The tasks
targeted the structuring of arguments and various rhetorical features, with a view to
proposing guidelines for the CEFR Bank of Descriptors for self-assessment of AW in
EU Portfolios.
Introduction
23
D.6.3 Tracking the Morphological Development of Written L2 French: How Do You
Learn to Write What You Cannot Hear?
Presenters: Malin Ågren, Lund University, Sweden
Jonas Granfeldt, Lund University, Sweden
Suzanne Schlyter, Lund University, Sweden
Abstract: This paper deals with the morphological development in written L2 French
by Swedish learners. The study is focusing on the L2 acquisition of number
agreement, which is particularly interesting in French where number morphology is
often silent in the oral language and thus potentially difficult to produce in writing.
D.7 Thursday, November 5, 2:15-3:30, Navajo
Session Chair: Ricky Lam, The Hong Kong Institute of Education, Hong Kong, China
D.7.1 Teacher Raters’ Reaction to the Use of Metadiscourse in Chinese EFL
Learners’ Argumentative Essays
Presenter: Lu Lu, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
Abstract: This study aims to examine the teacher raters’ reaction to Chinese EFL
learners’ performance on metadiscourse markers in argumentative essays. Four
teacher raters’ retrospective verbal reports of their rating processes, text-based
interviews and semi-structured interviews in relation to the students’ use of
metadiscourse have been examined. The research findings demonstrate that the
teacher raters commented more on the fulfillment of the cohesive and the rhetorical
functions of metadiscourse rather than upon the pragmatic functions of metadiscourse
per se.
D.7.2 Exploring the Relationship Between the Linguistic Features of Academic
Register and Chinese EFL Students’ Argument Essays
Presenter: Cui Zhang, Northern Arizona University, USA
Abstract: This study examined the relationship of Chinese EFL university students’
writing proficiency and their use of phrasal-level linguistic features related to
academic written register. Participants were 98 intermediate-proficiency
undergraduate students from a university in Northern China. Results showed
significant correlations between their holistic essay scores and several linguistic
features.
24 SSLW 2009
E Sessions – Thursday, November 5, 3:45-5:00
Special Session Thursday, November 5, 3:45-5:00, Gold
Session Chair: Paul Kei Matsuda, Arizona State University, USA
Doctoral Programs and Second Language Writing
Presenters: Dwight Atkinson, Purdue University, USA
Diane Belcher, Georgia State University, USA
Jay Jordan, University of Utah, USA
Jun Liu, University of Arizona, USA
Kate Mangelsdorf, University of Texas, El Paso, USA
Paul Kei Matsuda, Arizona State University, USA
Christina Ortmeier-Hooper, University of New Hampshire, USA
Ben Rafoth, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, USA
Tony Silva, Purdue University, USA
Fredricka Stoller, Northern Arizona University, USA
Xiaoye You, Pennsylvania State University, USA
Wei Zhu, University of South Florida, USA
Abstract: Doctoral programs provide an important institutional means of
reproducing second language writing specialists of the future. This session
features established second language writing specialists who work with doctoral
students to talk about opportunities their programs have to offer to students who
wish to develop their expertise in second language writing theory, research and
instruction. The session will serve as a way of sharing ideas about various ways in
which second language writing can be integrated into doctoral education as well as
an opportunity for prospective doctoral students and their current advisors to learn
about different options for doctoral studies.
E.1 Thursday, November 5, 3:45-5:00, Yuma
Session Chair: Catherine Smith, Arizona State University, USA
E.1.1 The Myth of Revising By Ear: Does It Help Second Language Writers?
Presenter: Soo Hyon Kim, Michigan State University, USA
Abstract: This study examines whether reading aloud helps L2 writers improve their
texts during revision, and to what extent language proficiency plays a role in this
process. The presentation opens up a venue for re-examining a pedagogical practice
perhaps being implemented in L2 writing instruction without much scrutiny.
E.1.2 Revisions in Real Time: Spanish Heritage Language Learners’ Writing
Processes in English and Spanish
Presenters: Idoia Elola, Texas Tech University, USA
Ariana Mikulski, Arizona State University, USA
Abstract: This study presents 12 SHL learners’ revision processes and evidence of
fluency, planning and composing when writing in English and Spanish. Analyses
Introduction
25
suggest their fluency, composing time and sentence level revision were greater in
English, but they revised more at the lexical level and used more planning time in
Spanish.
E.1.3 Future of Heritage Language Instruction in College Korean Courses: The Role
of Heritage Media in Enhancing Heritage Language Literacy Engagement
Presenters: Youngjoo Yi, Georgia State University, USA
Jayoung Choi, Georgia Institute of Technology, USA
Abstract: The presentation reports a qualitative study of Korean heritage language
(HL) literacy instruction and practices in an Advanced Korean course in an American
university. The presentation will focus on the role of heritage culture and media in
enhancing advanced HL learners’ writing skills and engagement in HL.
E.2 Thursday, November 5, 3:45-5:00, Pinal
Session Chair: Lawrence Jun Zhang, National Institute of Education, Nanyang
Technological University, Singapore
E.2.1 A Meta-Analysis of Strategy Instruction for L2 Writing
Presenter: Luke Plonsky, Michigan State University, USA
Abstract: This meta-analysis provides a quantitative measure of the cumulative
effects of strategy instruction on L2 writing. Following a contextualized interpretation
of the overall results, suggestions for developing a model of strategy instruction for
L2 writing are provided, and theoretical, methodological, and practical implications
of the findings are discussed.
E.2.2 Prompt Equivalence in a High-Stakes Test of Second Language Writing
Presenter: Mark Chapman, University of Michigan, USA
Abstract: The aim of this paper is to investigate the equivalence of different writing
prompts employed in a high-stakes test of English as a foreign language. It reports on
the early stages of a project to investigate the relationships between differences in
prompt variables and discourse features of the responses.
E.2.3 Learning and Unlearning Writing Practices: Reshaping the Notion of Transfer
in SLW
Presenters: Qian Du, The Ohio State University, USA
M. Sidury Christiansen, The Ohio State University, USA
Abstract: By investigating how international undergraduate students negotiate and
apply previously acquired knowledge of English academic writing to handle similar
but more challenging tasks, this presentation challenges the traditional view of
transfer as simply “carrying over” and reconceptualizes the notion as a dynamic and
ongoing process for L2 writers.
26 SSLW 2009
E.3 Thursday, November 5, 3:45-5:00, Yavapai
Session Chair: David Schmidt, Kennesaw State University, USA
E.3.1 Writing Center Tutors’ Questions with L2 Writers: How Effective They are
Presenter: Youn-Kyung Kim, Spalding University, USA
Abstract: Writing center tutors’ questions used with L2 students are analyzed to
examine whether tutors’ questions help L2 students self-formulate their own revision
plans. The results indicate that revision plans are often suggested by tutors, rather
than self-generated by students. The tutor-student interaction structure constitutes the
exchange of Initiating-Responding-Suggesting moves.
E.3.2 Learners Helping Learners in an EFL Writing Center
Presenter: George Hays, Tokyo International University, Japan
Abstract: This presentation reports the ongoing findings of native and non-native
speaking tutor/tutee dyads in a writing center at a Japanese university. Data,
consisting of interviews, written reports by tutors, and a questionnaire submitted by
tutees were gathered. Analysis showed need for NNS tutors, an undeveloped resource
in Japanese EFL environment.
E.3.3 The Writing Center and Better ESL Writers
Presenter: Scott Chien-Hsiung Chiu, Michigan State University, USA
Abstract: Writing Centers provide a unique environment and new learning
experiences for L2 learners to improve their writing. This study examines this
phenomenon and investigates how writing center pedagogy impacts L2 learners’
beliefs, contributes to developmental changes in writing, and better prepares ESL
writers for academic success.
E.4 Thursday, November 5, 3:45-5:00, Santa Cruz
Session Chair: Steve Simpson, University of New Hampshire, USA
E.4.1 Re-Appropriating the Amen Corner: A View of L2 Writing Beyond the
Classroom
Presenter: Rachel Reed, Auburn University, USA
Abstract: This study explores what literate practices ESL students already have and
how those abilities inform their actions. Drawing on observations, formal and
informal interviews, samples of school and non-school writing collected from a yearlong case study of Jane, an L2 student, my presentation traces her extensive
engagement in church and how these experiences inform and complicate her writing.
E.4.2 A Meta-Synthesis of Multilingual Students’ Home and Family Literacies
Presenter: Bong-gi Sohn, University of British Columbia, Canada
Abstract: This meta-synthesis study integrates research findings from multiple
qualitative studies to examine multilingual children’s use of literacy at home and
investigate its complexities.
Introduction
27
E.4.3 Explicitness in Computer-Based Feedback for Improving ESL Learners’
Persistent Grammatical Errors in Academic Writing
Presenter: Doe-Hyung Kim, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA
Abstract: The purpose of this presentation is to present the findings of a dissertation
study that examined the effectiveness of feedback that vary in its explicitness in a
computer-assisted language learning (CALL) tutorial environment designed to help
international students reduce persistent grammatical errors found in their academic
writing.
E.5 Thursday, November 5, 3:45-5:00, Coconino
Session Chair: Elisabeth Kramer, University of New Hampshire, USA
E.5.1 Korean EFL Teachers’ Perceptions of Their Own Written Feedback
Presenters: Hohsung Choe, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, Korea
Ho Jung Yu, Arizona State University, USA
Abstract: This study investigates Korean EFL teachers’ experiences providing
feedback to students about writing. Forty teachers at the university level participated
in this study. In order to capture general patterns in participants’ experiences, this
study employed a mixed-method research design: quantitative data through a
questionnaire and qualitative data through semi-structured interviews.
E.5.2 Teacher and Student Feedback in Written Commentary
Presenter: Hui-Tzu Min, National Cheng Kung University, Taiwan
Abstract: Research on peer and teacher written feedback seldom converge. This
study is designed to fill this void by comparing and contrasting teacher and student
written commentary on student compositions and the stances they take in providing
feedback in an EFL writing class.
E.5.3 Electronic Feedback—From Students’ Perspectives
Presenter: Chung-chien Karen Chang, Arizona State University, USA
Abstract: As electronic feedback on writing assignments becomes popular among
writing instructors, this study examines students’ acceptance level towards this format
of feedback provision. Moreover, the researcher provides specific feedback on
content development and grammar mechanics through marginal and in-text comments
to see how students respond to the comments for revision.
E.6 Thursday, November 5, 3:45-5:00, Apache
Session Chair: Yi-hui Chiu, National Taipei College of Business, Taiwan
E.6.1 The Use of Source Texts in Chinese EFL University Argumentative Writing
Presenters: Jingjing Qin, Northern Arizona University, USA
Erkan Karabacak, Northern Arizona University, USA
Abstract: Academic writing tasks in English-medium universities often necessitate
the use of readings (Campbell, 1990; Zhu, 2004). This study investigated how 80
Chinese EFL university students majoring in English used information from two pre-
28 SSLW 2009
selected texts with opposing views to write an English argumentative paper.
Pedagogical implications are discussed.
E.6.2 How Do University Students Attempt to Avoid Plagiarism? A Grammatical
Analysis of L1 and L2 Paraphrasing Strategies
Presenter: Casey Keck, San Francisco State University, USA
Abstract: This study analyzed 255 paraphrases composed by L1 and L2 writers. It
was found that paraphrases that avoided copying shared a common grammatical
strategy: Students identified key clause elements (e.g., the Subject) and changed their
grammatical form (e.g., by condensing a that-clause to a noun phrase). Pedagogical
implications are discussed.
E.7 Thursday, November 5, 3:45-5:00, Navajo
Session Chair: Linda Henriksen, Southeast Missouri State University, USA
E.7.1 Uncovering the Linguistic Diversity in a Writing Program
Presenter: Angela Dadak, American University, USA
Abstract: The presenter illustrates efforts to uncover the multilingual nature of the
student population – often hidden under assumptions and lack of data – in an
undergraduate US college writing program in order to promote greater incorporation
of second language writing research and practices in instructor development and
student support.
E.7.2 “No Such Thing as Success”: L2 Students in a Mainstream Freshman
Composition Course
Presenter: Christian Stuart, University of Washington, USA
Abstract: This qualitative research study explores the expectations, challenges, and
successes of three L2 students in a mainstream freshman composition course.
Findings show that the participants and their L1 classmates shared a lot of the same
struggles in the class, but that their strategies for dealing with these struggles differed
noticeably.
E.7.3 Learning to Play the Part: Second Language Writers Socialized into Academic
Discourse Through Teacher-Student Conferences
Presenter: Betsy Gilliland, University of California, Davis, USA
Abstract: This study examines the ways students are socialized into the academic
discourse community through writing conferences between two bilingual Latino ninth
grade students and their mainstream English language arts teacher as the students
work to revise drafts of an essay.
Introduction
29
Opening Reception – Thursday, November 5, 5:00-7:00, Engrained Café
Chair: Paul Kei Matsuda, Arizona State University, USA
Presenters: Debby Losse, Dean, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, Arizona State
University
Maureen Goggin, Chair, Department of English, Arizona State
University
Christine Pearson Casanave, Temple University, Japan Campus
Linda Lonon Blanton, Anatolia Elementary & Secondary/American
College of Thessaloniki
Sponsored by Bedford/St. Martin's Press
30 SSLW 2009
Second Language Writing at Arizona State University
Graduate students can focus on second language writing in a number of programs,
including:



Master’s Program in TESOL
http://english.clas.asu.edu/gradstudies-mtesol
Ph.D. Program in Applied Linguistics
http://appliedlinguistics.asu.edu/
Ph.D. Program in Rhetoric, Composition and Linguistics
http://english.clas.asu.edu/gradstudies-rhetcompling
ASU regularly offers courses on second language writing research and second language
writing instruction, which are open to students in any of the programs. Students can also
choose from a wide variety of related courses offered by world-class faculty members from
across ASU campuses.
Faculty members who specialize in second language writing include Mark A. James and
Paul Kei Matsuda. In addition, there are numerous faculty members in related fields across
the University, including (but certainly not limited to): Karen Adams, Akua Duku Anokye,
Patricia Boyd, Patricia Friedrich, James Paul Gee, Elly van Gelderen, Carrie Gillon,
Maureen Daly Goggin, Peter Goggin, Elisabeth Hayes, Sarah Hudelson, Barbara Lafford,
Elenore Long, Roy Major, Aya Matsuda, Keith Miller, Don Nilsen, Alice Robison, Duane
Roen, Shirley K. Rose, Bryan Smith, Doris Warriner, Terrence G. Wiley, and many others.
ASU is one of the largest, top-tier research institutions in the United States, enrolling a
large number of international students as well as resident students who bring a rich array of
multilingual and multicultural experience and resources. Graduate students will find a wide
variety of opportunities for teaching, research and professional development. Many students
teach in ASU’s well-established and comprehensive writing programs; others find teaching
and administrative positions in various programs. With the presence of linguistic diversity
both on and off campus, graduate students will find a plenty of research opportunities in the
Writing Programs, courses across the disciplines, American English and Culture Program
(an intensive English program), community colleges, heritage language programs, and
workplace language programs.
For more information about ASU, visit: http://www.asu.edu/.
Friday, November 6
31
Friday, November 6
Plenary I – Friday, November 6, 9:00-9:45, Arizona
The Future of Second Language Writing (and Reading) Instruction: Plus ça change;
plus c’est la même chose
Chair:
Ilona Leki, University of Tennessee, USA
Presenter: Ann Johns, San Diego State University, USA (Emerita)
Abstract: No doubt the teaching of writing (and reading), and our students'
experiences with literacies, have changed radically in the past few years as multimodalities have become increasingly prevalent and writing has become more
collaborative, informal, and global. However, for a number of reasons, the teaching of
second language literacies has not kept up with this fast-paced change. In this
presentation, I will discuss five goals for the second language writing classroom that
acknowledge and embrace change while drawing from the extensive pedagogical
accomplishments and research during the past 20 years or so. The five goals for our
classrooms should be: 1) Fostering student literacy research, that is, research into
genres and literacy practices in a variety of contexts; 2) Encouraging the interaction
of reading, writing, and technology and the extensive use of technologies to promote
different types of reading and writing; 3) Modeling literacy practices for multiple
texts and contexts, and encouraging writing for these contexts; 4) Promoting student
reflection and metacognition as integral to student literacy research and writing
practices, and 5) Re-assessing student assessments to value writing (and reading) for
the 21st century. Handouts related to these goals will be distributed.
Sponsored by Parlor Press
F Colloquia – Friday, November 6, 10:00-11:30
FC.1 Friday, November 6, 10:00-11:30, Arizona
Session Chair: Terry Santos, Humboldt State University, USA
FC.1 On the Future of Second Language Writing: 10 Years Later
Presenters: Terry Santos, Humboldt State University, USA
Dwight Atkinson, Purdue University, USA
Melinda Erickson, University of California, Berkeley, USA
Tony Silva, Purdue University, USA
Paul Kei Matsuda, Arizona State University, USA
Abstract: At TESOL 1999, a group of second language writing specialists
contemplated the future of the emering field of second language writing. In this
colloquium, the same group of presenters will consider the changes that have taken
place over the last decade and to reconsider the future of the field of second language
writing in light of those changes.
32 SSLW 2009
FC.2 Friday, November 6, 10:00-11:30, Turquoise
Session Chair: Melinda Reichelt, University of Toledo, USA
FC.2 The Future of Foreign Language Writing
Presenters: Melinda Reichelt, University of Toledo, USA
Natalie Lefkowitz, Central Washington University, USA
Jean Marie Schultz, University of California, Santa Barbara, USA
Carol Rinnert, Hiroshima City University, Japan
Abstract: The presenters will focus on foreign language (FL) writing instruction,
discussing FL writing in the following languages: Spanish, French, English, Japanese,
Chinese, German, and Russian. The discussion will be relevant to writing instruction
in other FLs as well. The presenters will address the following questions: What role
should writing play in the overall FL curriculum, and how much time should be
devoted to FL writing instruction? What constitute appropriate purposes for students
writing in FLs, especially in contexts where students’ real-life needs for FL writing
are not immediately obvious? How is FL writing different from other types of L2
writing (e.g., ESL writing)? What does FL writing have in common with other types
of L2 writing? How should L2 teacher education programs prepare future teachers
for teaching FL writing? What directions should FL writing research pursue: Which
issues should be investigated, which research methodologies are most appropriate,
and how can the field of FL writing form a community to support an emerging
research agenda
FC.3 Friday, November 6, 10:00-11:30, Gold
Session Chair: Marilyn K. Rahilly, George Mason University, USA
FC.3 Studies of Multilingual Writers’ Experiences at a U.S. University
Presenters: Melissa Allen, George Mason University, USA
Laurie Miller, George Mason University, USA
Terry Myers Zawacki, George Mason University, USA
Anna Habib, George Mason University, USA
Abstract: Four presenters report on two research studies of MLL writers: one tracks
former IEP students who've completed one year of university study; the other
investigates graduate/undergraduate students and faculty on experiences with writing
across the curriculum. They discuss how findings from both studies inform
WAC/writing center/IEP program assessment and improvement.
F Sessions – Friday, November 6, 10:00-11:15
F.1 Friday, November 6, 10:00-11:15, Lapaz West
Session Chair: Elaine Zaragoza, Arizona State University, USA
F.1.1 Rules on the Fly: Writing Center Tutors as L2 “Grammar” Instructors
Presenter: Terese Thonus, University of Kansas, USA
Abstract: How successful are writing center tutors as “grammar” instructors?
Transcripts of 18 tutorials with L2 writers were examined for “language-related
episodes” (Swain & Lapkin, 2002) and pragmatic structure of the evaluation-
Friday, November 6
33
suggestion-response sequences (Thonus, 2004). These interventions are discussed in
terms of L2 writer expectations, tutor authority, and language acquisition.
F.1.2 Aynchronous Online Tutoring, Face-to-Face Tutoring, and Second Language
Learning
Presenter: Carol Severino, University of Iowa, USA
Abstract: Challenging the prevailing writing center orthodoxy of indirect tutoring
based on the face-to-face paradigm, the author argues the value of asynchronous
online tutoring, a mode noted for its directness, because it contributes more to second
language (L2) learning than face to face (f2f) tutoring because of the stable visual
representations of the tutor’s scaffolding and reformulated language, which the
student reads, considers, and implements rather than base revisions on notes and
memory from the aural/oral exchanges of f2f tutoring.
F.1.3 Casting a Vision: Next Generation Writing Centers for Multilingual Graduate
Students
Presenter: Talinn Phillips, Ohio University, USA
Abstract: As L2 writing specialists look to the future, I consider how a Next
Generation Writing Center could effectively support multilingual graduate writers.
Based on a survey of writing centers’ services, I discuss several models for working
the multilingual graduate writers in the context of these writers’ unique needs.
F.2 Friday, November 6, 10:00-11:15, Lapaz East
Session Chair: Ryan Skinnell, Arizona State University, USA
F.2.1 Planning Subprocesses and Second Language Writing
Presenter: Mark Johnson, Northern Arizona University, USA
Abstract: The effect of planning sub-processes (idea generation, organization, and
goal setting) on fluency and textual features of L1 and L2 novice writers was
examined in order to determine how planning affects second language writing.
Organizational activities led to greater fluency and greater use of grammatical
features associated with academic prose.
F.2.2 The Positive Role of L1 on L2 Writing
Presenter: Echo Pittman, Memorial University of Newfoundland, Canada
Abstract: This paper, based on Vygotsky's theory, schema theory, and affective filter
theory, argues that insisting students to think in English only may not be a sound
pedagogical advice. It advocates that higher cognitive skills in one's native language
can be utilized to help one tackle writing difficulties in L2.
F.2.3 Writing Handbooks, L2 Writers, and the Selective Tradition
Presenter: Maria Jerskey, LaGuardia Community College, USA
Abstract: This case study examines editorial decisions made during the production of
a college writing handbook in addressing the learning needs of L2 writers. Adapting
the selective tradition as an interpretive framework, this study sheds light on hidden
34 SSLW 2009
value systems embedded in editorial decisions offering implications for developing
materials for L2 writers.
F.3 Friday, November 6, 10:00-11:15, Coconino
Session Chair: Bong-gi Sohn, University of British Columbia, Canada
F.3.1 Error Correction in ESL Writing: Context and Methodology Matter
Presenters: Norman Evans, Brigham Young University, USA
K. James Hartshorn, Brigham Young University, USA
Diane Strong-Krause, Brigham Young University, USA
Abstract: Based on research involving ESL students in university and IEP contexts,
two studies show how a methodology for error correction can significantly improve
the accuracy of ESL writers in one context but not in others. Findings suggest that
different teaching, learning, and research contexts may substantially affect L2 writing
accuracy.
F.3.2 Are We Doing It Right? Assessment of Grammatical Ability in Second
Language Writing
Presenter: Heike Neumann, McGill University/Concordia University, Canada
Abstract: To what extent is the academic essay an effective tool to assess second
language writers’ grammatical ability? This mixed methods study examines what
indicators academic writing teachers attend to in the assessment process. The results
point towards the construct of grammatical ability that is assessed in writing
classrooms.
F.3.3 Balancing the Dual Functions of Portfolio Assessment: Lessons from a Case
Study
Presenters: Ricky Lam, The Hong Kong Institute of Education, Hong Kong, China
Icy Lee, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
Abstract: Drawing upon a case study, this paper aims to investigate how the
summative and formative functions of portfolio assessment (PA) could be duly
balanced through its formative potentials and how PA can integrate teaching and
assessment to benefit students’ learning of writing.
G Colloquia – Friday, November 6, 12:30-2:00
GC.1 Friday, November 6, 12:30-2:00, Arizona
Session Chair: Deborah Crusan, Wright State University, USA
GC.1 The Future of L2 Writing Assessment
Presenters: Deborah Crusan, Wright State University, USA
Sara Weigle, Georgia State University
Liz Hamp-Lyons, University of Bedfordshire, United Kingdom
Edward White, University of Arizona
Sponsored by Assessing Writing and Elsevier
Friday, November 6
35
GC.2 Friday, November 6, 12:30-2:00, Turquoise
Session Chair: Rosa Manchón, University of Murcia, Spain
GC.2 SLA and Second Language Writing
Presenters: Charlene Polio, Michigan State University, USA
Jessica Williams, University of Illinois-Chicago, USA
Rosa Manchón, University of Murcia, Spain
Abstract: This colloquium will explore the contribution that research on L2 writing
can make to current theorizing on second language acquisition (SLA), as well as the
way in which SLA theory and research can inform L2 writing research.
GC.3 Friday, November 6, 12:30-2:00, Gold
Session Chair: Jiraporn Dhanarattigannon, Kasetsart University, Thailand
GC.3.1 Writing Process and Thai EFL Learners: Looking for the Future
Presenter: Jiraporn Dhanarattigannon, Kasetsart University, Thailand
Abstract: This case study explores how Thai EFL college students perceive the
nontraditional process-based writing instruction especially the revision process and
teacher-student conference. The findings should be the legitimate guidance for ESL/
EFL teachers and researchers to provide the more effective instruction to promote the
optimal performance of these writers.
GC.3.2 The Cultural Schema and EFL Student Writers
Presenter: Pataraporn Tapinta, Kasetsart University, Thailand
Abstract: This case study of Thai EFL student writers investigates how their
classroom learning culture influences their perceptions and writing behaviors. It
focuses on the factors hindering their effective performance during the process of
producing multiple drafts. Knowing the role of writer’s cultural schema should
enhance effective EFL writing instruction.
GC.3.3 Persistent Difficulties of EFL Learners in a Process-Product Based Writing
Instruction: Exploring for the Future
Presenter: Bussba Tonthong, Kasetsart University, Thailand
Abstract: This case study explores the perception and performance of EFL students
in a process-product-based writing class. It was found that the learners perform their
writing with tremendous difficulties. This presentation offers an insight into why the
difficulties are persistent. Implications for scaffolding EFL/ESL learners in the future
are discussed.
36 SSLW 2009
G Sessions – Friday, November 6, 12:30-1:45
G.1 Friday, November 6, 12:30-1:45, Lapaz West
Session Chair: Ju Zhan, Jilin University, China
G.1.1 Helping NNES Engineering Graduate Students Better Understand Plagiarism
Presenter: Dawn Bikowski, Ohio University, USA
Abstract: This presentation will highlight research on the computer-mediated
communication (CMC) of 75 NNES graduate students from a variety of countries in a
scientific writing course. Class observations and student interviews supplement the
discourse analysis of the CMC. Findings on students’ understandings and
misunderstandings will be discussed, as will pedagogical implications.
G.1.2 Improvements in L2 Writers’ Paraphrasing Skills for Academic Summary
Writing
Presenter: Choon Kim, St. Cloud State University, USA
Abstract: This study examines L2 academic summaries. What is the nature of
developmental changes in paraphrasing skills? What is the relationship between two
evaluation methods: analysis of paraphrases vs. instructors’ holistic rating? The
findings have implications for teaching and assessment in college-level academic
writing and training future teachers in MA-TESL programs.
G.1.3 A Comparison of Japanese and Taiwanese Students’ Summary Writing
Operations
Presenter: Masumi Ono, University of Essex, United Kingdom
Abstract: The present paper investigates whether there are any differences between
Japanese and Taiwanese students’ summary writing operations. Written summaries
were analysed by using macrorules and the results showed no cultural differences
between the two groups although individual differences were found in the use of
additional information in summaries.
G.2 Friday, November 6, 12:30-1:45, Lapaz East
Session Chair: Mira Bekar, Purdue University, USA
G.2.1 Examining Sojourners’ Academic Literacy Socialization: An Ecological
Perspective
Presenter: Sandra Zappa-Hollman, University of British Columbia, Canada
Abstract: This multiple-case study explores the second language academic literacy
socialization of Mexican exchange student at a large Canadian English-medium
university. The findings demonstrate that to achieve an ecological perspective of
students’ academic literacy development, a model that integrates the analysis of
feedback, resources, institutional support, and their social networks is needed.
Friday, November 6
37
G.2.2 What’s the Task? On the Significance of Task in Teaching Writing
Presenter: Lukasz Salski, University of Lodz, Poland
Abstract: The present paper reports on a pilot study which uses think-aloud protocols
to investigate the impact of task on both the process and product of writing. It is
hoped that the results of the study will shed light on how a task should be constructed
in order to direct, rather than restrict, EFL writers.
G.2.3 Raising College Students’ Real Voice Through Online Dialogue Journal Writing
Presenter: Ai-Ling Wang, Tamkang University, Taipei, Taiwan, Taiwan
Abstract: This study investigates how communicative writing and the use of
computers in writing may affect EFL college students’ perception of writing in
English and may provide student with opportunities to express themselves. The
analysis of an online dialogue journal writing activity in a college junior composition
class, suggests that dialogue journal writing does not replace but complement
traditional writing instruction.
G.3 Friday, November 6, 12:30-1:45, Coconino
Session Chair: Masumi Narita, Tokyo International University, Japan
G.3.1 Rhetorical Features of L2 College Students’ Argumentative Essays That Used
Source Texts
Presenter: Hae Sung Yang, San Francisco State University, USA
Abstract: The present study identified the rhetorical moves that L2 university student
essays used to take a stance on an issue they had read about in multiple source texts.
Most essays included main moves, but low-scored essays did not follow a consistent
submove structure within each main point.
G.3.2 Linguistic Markers of Higher and Lower Quality Student Writing
Presenters: Stephen Doolan, Northern Arizona University, USA
Donald Miller, Northern Arizona University, USA
Abstract: This presentation describes a study investigating the predictive value of
linguistic markers (e.g. errors, clausal structures) in relation to quality of L2 writing.
Findings from the current study also compare the predictive value of these linguistic
markers when applied to two distinct adult L2 populations: Generation 1.5 and
international students.
G.3.3 Challenging Stereotypes about Academic Writing: Complexity, Elaboration,
Explicitness
Presenter: Doug Biber, Northern Arizona University, USA
Abstract: The present talk challenges the stereotypes that academic writing is
grammatically complex, with elaborated structures, and with meaning relations
expressed explicitly. On the one hand, the study shows that conversation is
structurally complex and elaborated, to an even greater extent than academic writing
for some grammatical features. At the same time, the study shows that academic
writing does not make extensive use of the structures that are stereotypically
associated with complexity (especially dependent clauses). Rather, the grammatical
38 SSLW 2009
complexities of writing tend to be phrasal rather than clausal, resulting in a
compressed rather than elaborated discourse style.
H Colloquia – Friday, November 6, 2:15-3:45
HC.1 Friday, November 6, 2:15-3:45, Arizona
Session Chair: Bryan Smith, Arizona State University, USA
HC.1 Technology and L2 Writing
Presenters: Greg Kessler, Ohio University, USA
Elena Cotos, Iowa State University, USA
Martha C. Pennington, Georgia Southern University, USA
Randi Reppen, Northern Arizona University, USA
Bryan Smith, Arizona State University, USA
Sponsored by Writing & Pedagogy and Equinox
HC.2 Friday, November 6, 2:15-3:45, Turquoise
Session Chair: Carol Severino, University of Iowa, USA
HC.2 L2 Writing in the Writing Center
Presenters: Paula Gillespie, Florida International University, USA
Ben Rafoth, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, USA
Carol Severino, University of Iowa, USA
Terese Thonus, University of Kansas, USA
HC.3 Friday, November 6, 2:15-3:45, Gold
Session Chair: Tony Silva, Purdue University
HC.3.1 Spanish and Portuguese Writing-Enriched Curriculum Project: A Joint
Project
Presenters: Maria Emilce Lopez, University of Minnesota, USA
Susan McMillen Villar, University of Minnesota, USA
Abstract: Presentation of the process through which the Department of Spanish and
Portuguese at the University of Minnesota coordinated with the University’s WritingEnhanced Curriculum Project to design a plan to more efficiently integrate writing
into the undergraduate curriculum and assess the plan’s efficacy while providing
instructional support.
HC.3.2 Online Writing System and Portfolio for First-Year Spanish
Presenter: Frances Matos-Schultz, University of Minnesota- Twin Cities, USA
Abstract: This session will discuss a web-based writing environment developed to
facilitate the delivery of meaningful feedback. The system also sustains online writing
communities in first-year language classes, in which the writers/learners take
ownership over the text and share the task as collaborators and critics with minimal
instructor’s administrative intervention.
Friday, November 6
39
H Sessions – Friday, November 6, 2:15-3:30
H.1 Friday, November 6, 2:15-3:30, Lapaz West
Session Chair: Shawna Shapiro, Middlebury College, USA
H.1.1 Multilingual Students, Their Views of Identity Labels, and First Year
Composition Placement Preferences
Presenter: Todd Ruecker, University of Texas at El Paso, USA
Abstract: This presentation is based on the results of surveys administered to 215
students in mainstream and ESOL FYC classrooms. The surveys explored the
connections between English usage, multilingual status, self-identification with
linguistic identity labels, attitudes towards these labels, and satisfaction with FYC
placement.
H.1.2 Improving Placement Practices for Diverse Multilingual Writers: An
Institutional Case Study
Presenters: Tanita Saenkhum, Arizona State University, USA
Steven Accardi, Arizona State University, USA
Paul Kei Matsuda, Arizona State University, USA
Abstract: Multilingual writers—both resident and international students—are often
misplaced in first-year composition sequences in US colleges and universities.
Through an institutional case study, the presenters will identify some of the possible
reasons and discuss what a writing program can do to improve placement practices to
better accommodate these students.
H.1.3 Mainstreamed L2 Writers: Are Their Instructors “Ready” for Them?
Presenter: Stefan Frazier, San Jose State University, USA
Abstract: On many campuses, L2 writers are “thrown in” with everyone else
throughout their undergraduate writing careers. But how well are their instructors
prepared for them? The presenter offers the results of a survey of basic writing and
FYC instructors on L2 writing students and issues.
H.2 Friday, November 6, 2:15-3:30, Lapaz East
Session Chair: Yuching Jill Yang, Arizona State University, USA
Featured Session: The Role of Qualitative Dissertation Advisors in Contributing to
Future Changes in Academic Discourse
Presenter: Christine Pearson Casanave, Temple University, Japan Campus
Abstract: In this talk I speculate about the role of qualitative dissertation advisors in
helping to shift future academic discourse from its (stereo)typical impersonal
formulaic style to a style that is more personal, engaging, and readable. Can
dissertation writers contribute to such changes, or does change best come from the
top-down?
40 SSLW 2009
H.3 Friday, November 6, 2:15-3:30, Coconino
Session Chair: Ryan Skinnell, Arizona State University, USA
H.3.1 “What Am I Supposed to Say?” ESL Students’ Expectations of Writing
Conferences
Presenter: Yingliang Liu, Georgia Gwinnett College, USA
Abstract: This study examines the ESL students’ expectations of teacher-student
writing conferences. Results show that ESL students, not familiar with the dynamic
feature of the conference, expect direct instructions from the teacher without planning
to explain their own thoughts. These expectations are shaped by factors beyond
individual preferences.
H.3.2 Using the Four Questions to Focus Student Writing
Presenter: Louise Green, University of Nouakchott, Mauritana
Abstract: Teaching students with educational backgrounds in either French or Arabic
has led to some difficulties in teaching students how to choose a research topic and
how to give it an “argumentative edge”. Sometime in my second term of teaching a
massive class of 250 students, I realized the significance of the “four questions.”
Plenary II – Friday, November 6, 4:00-4:45, Arizona
The Future Ain’t What it Used to Be
Chair:
Bryan Smith, Arizona State University, USA
Presenter: Mark Warschauer, University of California, Irvine, USA
Abstract: Less than two decades ago, new forms of socially constructed multimedia
were believed to be devaluing writing, marginalizing the essay, and contributing to a
postmodern death of the author. But today, writing is more important than ever before
in human history, the essay is critical to success in schools and influence in society,
and, as Chris Chesher has noted, “the author is alive and well, and has a blog.” This
paper briefly summarizes the history of computers and writing, surveys its current
terrain, and examines its future, particularly in relationship to second language
teaching and learning. Issues addressed included the development and diffusion of
low-cost wireless mobile devices such as netbooks and smartbooks; the expanding
role of open source software, open educational resources, and cloud computing,
especially in conjunction with these devices; the affordances of Web 2.0 tools such as
blogs and wikis and their impact on writing; the evolution of artificial intelligencebased software to score and respond to writing and the increased use of such software
in schools; and the social and economic context that shapes who has access to all
these tools and how they are used inside and outside the classroom.
Special Reception – Friday, November 6, 5:00-7:00, Engrained Café
A Special Reception in Honor of JSLW Editors and Board Members
Chair:
Paul Kei Matsuda, Arizona State University, USA
Presenter: Ilona Leki, University of Tennessee, USA
Saturday, November 7 41
Saturday, November 7
Plenary III – Saturday, November 7, 9:00-9:45, Arizona
Exploring Learning Transfer in Second Language Writing Education
Chair:
Tanita Saenkhum, Arizona State University, USA
Presenter: Mark A. James, Arizona State University, USA
Abstract: A fundamental goal of second language writing education is that learners
develop knowledge and skills that they can apply beyond the learning context. In
other words, if learning occurs in a L2 writing classroom but students cannot apply
that learning outside that classroom, instruction has limited value. This goal involves
learning transfer, which refers to the application of learning in novel situations. In
some education circles, assumptions have been made that if learning occurs, learning
transfer inevitably follows; however, a century of research on learning transfer in
experimental and educational psychology suggests that learning does not
automatically lead to learning transfer, and that learning transfer can, in fact, be
difficult to stimulate. This presentation will explore learning transfer in L2 writing
education through a discussion of the following questions: What is learning transfer
in L2 writing education? In what ways is learning transfer relevant in this area? How
has learning transfer in L2 writing education been investigated, and what has been
learned? Finally, what directions might be taken in future research on learning
transfer in this area?
I Colloquia – Saturday, November 7, 10:00-11:30
IC.1 Saturday, November 7, 10:00-11:30, Arizona
Session Chair: Icy Lee, Chinese University of Hong Kong, China
IC.1 Teaching and Learning of Writing in Asian School Contexts
Presenters: Icy Lee, Chinese University of Hong Kong, China
Kyoko Oi, Chiba University, Japan
Kai-lin Wu, Tunghai University, Taiwan
Lawrence Jun Zhang, National Institute of Education, Nanyan
Technological University, Singapore
Abstract: While much existing L2 research focuses on writing instruction in college
contexts, teaching and learning of school writing has received less attention. The
presenters of this colloquium will explore the teaching and learning of writing in
Asian school contexts, highlighting a range of issues including learners’ motivation
for writing, the use of literacy autobiographies, the development of critical thinking
skills through teaching writing, and scaffolding the writing process through text-type
based instruction. By drawing upon research and experience in Hong Kong, Taiwan,
Japan and Singapore, the presenters will highlight some common issues that face
teachers and learners in Asian school contexts. Implications for teaching, learning and
teacher education will be discussed.
42 SSLW 2009
IC.2 Saturday, November 7, 10:00-11:30, Turquoise
Session Chair: Dana Ferris, University of California, Davis, USA
IC.2 Re-Examining “Generation 1.5”
Presenters: Dana Ferris, University of California, Davis, USA
Mark Roberge, San Francisco State University, USA
Kay Losey, Grand Valley State University, USA
Margi Wald, University of California, Berkeley, USA
IC.3 Saturday, November 7, 10:00-11:30, Gold
Session Chair: Fredricka Stoller, Northern Arizona University, USA
IC.3.1 “Who Did You Get for Freshmen Comp?” Instructor Differences in Feedback
and Grading
Presenter: Victoria Clark-Sanchez, Northern Arizona University, USA
Abstract: Which elements of writing skill are most salient to freshmen English
writing instructors? How does instructors’ written feedback on student papers reflect
these values? This study uses mixed methods to examine how ‘good writing’ is
characterized in a corpus of written feedback to 100 L1/L2 English students and
interviews with 10 instructors.
IC.3.2 The Effectiveness of Corrective Feedback on Chinese EFL Learners’
Grammatical Accuracy Improvement
Presenter: Dongmei Cheng, Northern Arizona University, USA
Abstract: This study explores the long-term effectiveness of teacher-provided
indirect corrective feedback on Chinese EFL writers’ accuracy improvement. Sixty
participants were randomly assigned to three groups: underlining, underlining with
codes, and no grammatical feedback. Preliminary results showed the positive effect of
both types of indirect feedback. Pedagogical implications will be discussed.
IC.3.3 Teacher and Student Feedback on L2 Student Writing
Presenter: Jonathan Smart, Northern Arizona University, USA
Abstract: This study compares how teachers and students respond to L2 student
writing. Four participant groups (university faculty, English language teachers, native
English undergraduates, and ESL students) provided feedback on an essay authored
by an ESL student. The presentation describes the important differences and
similarities among the participants’ written feedback.
I Sessions – Saturday, November 7, 10:00-11:15
I.1 Saturday, November 7, 10:00-11:15, Lapaz West
Session Chair: Marna Broekhoff, University of Oregon, USA (Emerita)
I.1.1 Bridging the Gap: Composition and Applied Linguistics in the Writing Center
Presenters:
Chloe de los Reyes, California State University, San Bernardino, USA
Gina Hanson, California State University, San Bernardino, USA
Saturday, November 7 43
Carol Peterson Haviland, California State University, San Bernardino,
USA
Deanna Hernandez, California State University, San Bernardino, USA
Aldo Lewis, California State University, San Bernardino, USA
Erika Macias, California State University, San Bernardino, USA
Abstract: This session will offer a critical comparison of how TESOL/applied
linguistics and composition studies inform the tutoring of L2 writers in writing
centers. It examines the spaces where the two fields intersect and diverge and thus
identifies knowledge each can gain from working with the other.
I.1.2 Writing Centers and the Resident ESL Writer: Mapping New Routes
Presenters: Jennifer Ritter, Westminster College, USA
Jenny Staben, College of Lake County, USA
Abstract: The presenters will discuss pedagogical approaches to tutoring resident
ESL writers in our writing centers, in particular at open-enrollment institutions. These
challenges include literacy and language learning experiences that do not adequately
prepare students for the challenges of college-level writing.
I.1.3 Espionage and My Failed Attempt to Start a Writing Center in Namibia
Presenter: Marna Broekhoff, University of Oregon, USA (Emerita)
Abstract: My expectations of the challenges I would face in starting a college writing
center in the impoverished country of Namibia scarcely resembled the realities I
experienced, which included charges of espionage. The term, “contact zone,” gained
new meaning. This presentation aims to open the eyes of anyone contemplating a
similar assignment.
I.2 Saturday, November 7, 10:00-11:15, Lapaz East
Session Chair: Matt Hammill, Arizona State University, USA
Featured Session: Writing Groups for Academics: Benefits, Logistics, and Privilege
Presenter: Stephanie Vandrick, University of San Francisco, USA
Abstract: Writing groups provide support and practical assistance to academic
writers; such groups can be powerful and effective. The presenter offers guidelines
for forming and maintaining useful writing groups, with various versions for various
purposes and situations. She discusses the role of privilege, and provides examples
from her own experience.
I.3 Saturday, November 7, 10:00-11:15, Coconino
Session Chair: Pataraporn Tapinta, Kasetsart University, Thailand
I.3.1 Teaching Coherence and Cohesion in Writing
Presenter: Sheila Mayne, University of Pennsylvania, USA
Abstract: The presenter will begin with an overview of the linguistic theories used to
explain coherence and cohesion. She will explain how she matched these theories
with the needs of her L2 writing students. Finally, she will show lessons she uses to
teach coherence: reader/writer based, cohesive ties, and more.
44 SSLW 2009
I.3.2 Connective Adverbials: a Source of Cohesion in Learner Writing?
Presenter: Mark Shea, Michigan State University, USA
Abstract: The present study analyzed the use of connective adverbials as cohesive
devices in a learner corpus consisting of timed writings rated on a multiple-trait scale.
No significant correlation was found between adverbial use and text quality. An
analysis of “deeper” cohesive ties (e.g., lexical repetition) is currently being
conducted.
I.3.3 New Intercultural Rhetoric Approaches in Second Language Writing
Presenter: Amanda Hobmeier, DePaul University, USA
Abstract: This presentation uses a newly adapted Intercultural Rhetoric
methodological approach to evaluate the autobiographical essay genre written by a
Swiss ESL class. Through text analysis and a survey study, the presenter highlights
the role of gender identity in L2 writing, extending a previous L1 study to an
intercultural context.
J Colloquia – Saturday, November 7, 12:30-2:00
JC.1 Saturday, November 7, 12:30-2:00, Arizona
Session Chair: Christine Tardy, DePaul University, USA
JC.1 The Future of Genre in L2 Writing
Presenters: Christine Tardy, DePaul University, USA
Sunny Hyon, California State University, San Bernardino
An Cheng, Oklahoma State University
Guillaume Gentil, Carleton University
Diane Belcher, Georgia State University
Abstract: Genre has become an important component of second language writing
theory and practice, evidenced by its presence in the classrooms and conversations of
the field. In this colloquium, genre scholars look to future directions of such work.
Christine Tardy will begin with a brief history of genre in L2 writing, highlighting
some of the key developments in the past three decades of scholarship. Next, Sunny
Hyon will consider genre as a construct that can create common pedagogical ground
for L1 and L2 compositionists, breaking through some of the terminological
differences that often hinder productive cross-disciplinary conversations. An Cheng
then turns to the relationship between language awareness and genre awareness,
exploring how research in this area can suggest new directions for theory,
methodology, and pedagogy in genre and L2 writing. Next, Guillaume Gentil will
explore the potential of research that goes beyond binaries of L1 and L2 genre
learning by considering the fruitful area of biliteracy and genre learning, addressing
the needs of bilingual writers. Finally, Diane Belcher will illustrate how critical
discourse analysis and corpus analysis can be used to study the power of genres,
offering a methodological approach to investigating the under-investigated claim that
genres provide access to power.
Saturday, November 7 45
JC.2 Saturday, November 7, 12:30-2:00, Turquoise
Session Chair: Christina Ortmeier-Hooper, University of New Hampshire, USA
JC.2 Building Bridges between Second Language Writing and Teacher
Development/Education
Presenters: Michelle Cox, Bridgewater State University
Christina Ortmeier-Hooper, University of New Hampshire
Youngjoo Yi, Georgia State University
Abstract: In this colloquium, we take up Hirvela and Belcher’s (2007) call for
attention to L2 writing specialists’ third identity as “teachers of teachers of writing.”
The first presenter, Youngjoo Yi, addresses the role of L2 writing pedagogy in
TESOL teacher education and discusses preliminary findings from a study of inservice and pre-service teachers’ sense of (un)preparedness to teach L2 writing, their
prevalent opinions about challenges for L2 writing instruction and their perceived
significant factors influencing L2 writing instruction. Christina Ortmeier-Hooper, the
second presenter, furthers this discussion by addressing the role of L2 writing
pedagogy in the teacher training of content-area teachers at the secondary level,
sharing preliminary findings on in-service teachers and teacher education faculty, and
their preparedness to work with L2 writers in secondary school settings. She
concludes by describing her recent work on a grant-funded initiative, as one possible
model for collaboration and research with content-area teacher educators. Finally,
Michelle Cox, a Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC) director, considers what it
means to be a teacher of higher education faculty who teach (with writing) in core
courses and majors. This talk will explore how advocacy for L2 student writers can
be integrated into WAC programming, drawing on universal design as a pedagogical
framework that builds on students’ strengths as writers and rhetoricians. The
colloquium will end with time for questions and further discussion.
JC.3 Saturday, November 7, 12:30-2:00, Gold
Session Chair: Yin Ling Cheung, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
JC.3.1 Understanding the Process of Publishing Journal Papers from a Socio-Cultural
Perspective: The Case of Hong Kong
Presenter: Yin Ling Cheung, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
Abstract: This study investigated the perceptions of Hong Kong non-native English
speaking doctoral students as writers of journal articles, their difficulties in getting
papers published in refereed journals, the strategies they use to cope with difficulties
ranging from writing to publishing, and their perceptions of their training on research
publications.
JC.3.2 Situated Learning, Systems Thinking, and the Ecology of Publishing as an
International Doctoral Student
Presenter: Steve Simpson, University of New Hampshire, USA
Abstract: Drawing from a case study of an international doctoral student writing for
publication in an environmental studies journal, this presentation provides a more
holistic framework for researching advanced academic literacy by synthesizing socio-
46 SSLW 2009
historic learning theory with systems thinking, a method used to study interrelated
phenomena within ecosystems.
JC.3.3 Understanding How Students’ Learning-to-Write Process is Mediated by Their
Teachers in the Chinese EFL Context
Presenter: Xiao Lei, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
Abstract: This paper explores how students' learning-to-write process is mediated by
teachers. Data include interviews of eight participants’ learning-to-write experience,
process logs of their writing process of two after-class assignments, and interviews of
their reflections on these assignments. Findings show that participants' wiritng is
mediated by teachers via the sociocultural milieu.
J Sessions – Saturday, November 7, 12:30-1:45
J.1 Saturday, November 7, 12:30-1:45, Lapaz West
Session Chair: Tanita Saenkhum, Arizona State University, USA
J.1.1 A Communities of Practice Perspective on ESL Graduate Student Socialization
into Academic Writing
Presenters: Andrea Stiefvater, Mohawk Valley Community College, USA
Gulbahar Beckett, University of Cincinnati, USA
Abstract: The purpose of this presentation is to provide a communities of practice
perspective on ESL graduate student socialization into academic writing. The
presentation reports on how students are socialized into the mode (symbolic
organization) metafunction of texts, and how this impacted students’ participation in
their chosen communities of practice.
J.1.2 Secondary English Teachers’ Views on Writing Instruction in EFL Context: A
Case of Korea
Presenter: Eunsook Shim, Sangji University, Korea
Abstract: The purpose of the study is to investigate secondary English teachers’
views on writing instruction and practices of teaching writing in EFL contexts. Eighty
secondary school teachers of English in Korea participate. Several obstacles in
teaching writing in EFL contexts and suggestions on teacher training programs are
discussed.
J.2 Saturday, November 7, 12:30-1:45, Lapaz East
Session Chair: Rae Lin, University of British Columbia, Canada
J.2.1 What Multilingual Students Need to Know About College Writing: A
Metacognitive Approach
Presenters: Jonathan Hall, York College, City University of New York, USA
Nela Navarro, Rutgers University, Newark, USA
Abstract: This panel presents a rationale for our project addressing first-year
multilingual college students. Using a structure of Recognition-MetacognitionApplication, our goal is helping multilingual students develop self-reflective
Saturday, November 7 47
awareness of their language learning process, identify and understand pedagogical
approaches in a specific writing course, and adopt active engagement strategies for
success.
J.2.2 Differences Between Vietnamese, EFL and English Argumentative Essays:
Pedagogical Implications for EFL Academic Writing Classes
Presenter: Vu Ho, Georgetown University, USA
Abstract: This research compared argumentative TOEFL essays by Vietnamese
students with native expert writings in L1 and L2, examining both text-centered and
user/context-centered features. Explanations for findings were sought by considering
L1 influence and local cultural/educational/political practices. A three-stage
contrastive module was developed and incorporated into regular EFL academic
writing classes.
J.2.3 Initiation and Development of Academic Literacy Through Scholarly Texts: A
Case Study of a Japanese EFL Learner
Presenter: Yutaka Fujieda, Maebashi Kyoai Gakuen College, Japan
Abstract: This investigation is to explore how a Japanese EFL undergraduate student
develops her academic literacy through the negotiation of meaning with the scholarly
texts and examines how this acquisition of academic literacy promotes her
development of academic writing in English.
J.3 Saturday, November 7, 12:30-1:45, Coconino
Session Chair: Linda Lonon Blanton, Anatolia Elementary & Secondary/American
College of Thessaloniki
J.3.1 Problematizing “Scaffolding” in Adolescent Second Language (L2) Writing: An
Interactive View from the Content Areas
Presenter: Amanda Kibler, Stanford University, USA
Abstract: This case study of an adolescent L2 writer analyzes teacher scaffolding
during a series of informal writing conferences in a mainstream high school history
class. Interactional sociolinguistic analysis reveals that teacher and student co-create
highly explicit scaffolding, leading participants to the conclusion that the teacher
“wrote it for him.”
J.3.2 Enabling Children to Write Better: a Case for Learner-Chosen Topics
Presenter: Chintan Modi, English and Foreign Languages University, India
Abstract: This paper makes a case for learner-chosen topics in ESL writing
classrooms in India, in order to utilise the real life experiences, interests and
background knowledge of learners as resources to support their learning. This will
enable them to approach writing with greater openness and enthusiasm, and show
gains in terms of length, elaboration, number of complex sentences, conceptual links
between paragraphs, and variety of word use.
48 SSLW 2009
K Colloquia – Saturday, November 7, 2:15-3:45
KC.1 Saturday, November 7, 2:15-3:45, Arizona
Session Chair: Maria Estela Brisk, Boston College, USA
KC.1 L2 Writing Through the Lens of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory
Presenters: Maria Estela Brisk, Boston College, USA
Meg Gebhard, University of Massachusetts at Amherst, USA
Daniel Kies, College of DuPage, USA
Sandra Gollin Kies, Benedictine University, USA
Abstract: This colloquium focuses on research and practice in second language
writing informed by systemic functional linguistics (SFL). Four research papers
address writing and teaching strategies in elementary, high school, and college levels.
More specifically, they (1) explore the development of voice among elementary
students through control of person in relation to genre; (2) analyze the use of SFL in
designing curriculum and tracking changes in students’ textual practices in grades K8; (3) examine strategies used by generation 1.5 students to organize information in
their texts (i.e., Theme/Rheme patterns) and show how those strategies often work
against their best interests as they transition to first-year writing programs in college;
and (4) evaluate the role of explicit instruction in assisting international graduate
students to develop control over thematic development and information focus in their
discipline-based academic writing.
KC.2 Saturday, November 7, 2:15-3:45, Turquoise
Session Chair: Paul Kei Matsuda, Arizona State University, USA
KC.2 Institutionalizing L2 Writing
Presenters: Kevin Eric De Pew, Old Dominion University, USA
Paul Kei Matsuda, Arizona State University, USA
Susan Miller-Cochran, North Carolina State University, USA
Jessie Moore, Elon University, USA
Christina Ortmeier-Hooper, University of New Hampshire, USA
Abstract: The purpose of this colloquium is to bring together leaders who have been
active in promoting second language writing within larger professional organizations
to collectively reflect on their involvements in the efforts to institutionalize second
language writing. Focusing on two major organizations—the Conference on College
Composition and Communication (CCCC) and Teachers of English to Speakers of
Other Languages (TESOL)—the presenters will discuss why institutionalization is
important, how second language writing can be integrated into larger organizational
structures, what second language writing specialists active at other organizations
might learn from their experience. The presenters will also share their thoughts on
some of the challenges and pitfalls of institutionalization efforts as well as strategies
for overcoming them.
Saturday, November 7 49
KC.3 Saturday, November 7, 2:15-3:45, Gold
Session Chair: Sabina Nowak, Higher Vocational School, Poland
KC.3.1 Academic Blogging: a Case Study of Generation 1.5 College Students’
Experiences of Weblog Writing in a First-Year College Writing Course
Presenter: Sun Yung Song, the Ohio State University, USA
Abstract: This presentation reports the findings of an ongoing study examining the
impact of blogging on the academic writing development of Generation 1.5 college
students in a first-year college writing course. It then discusses pedagogical
implications of how blogging can contribute to the academic writing development of
Generation 1.5 college students.
KC.3.2 Negotiating Intersubjectivity in English Blogging (CANCELLED)
Presenter: Yu-Feng (Diana) Yang, National Sun Yat-Sen University, Taiwan
Abstract: This presentation reports a working research project, exploring how
college English language learners of different culture backgrounds negotiate and coconstruct rules of English blogging. It hopes to bring in discussions regarding English
language learners’ online writing practice framed in the view of writing as social
construction.
KC.3.3 Web-Blogging in ESL Writing: Weaving a Class into a Community
Presenter: Sin I Miranda Ma, Southern Illinois University Carbondale, USA
Abstract: This presentation examines the idea that the essence of learning isn’t based
only on content material absorption, but also in a constant generation of output. The
example used is how a traditional teacher-centered ESL writing classroom was
transformed into a student directed classroom through the introduction of a class
weblog.
K Sessions – Saturday, November 7, 2:15-3:30
K.1 Saturday, November 7, 2:15-3:30, Lapaz West
Session Chair: Louise Green, University of Nouakchott, Canada
K.1.1 The Impact(?) of Second Language Writing Research on U.S. University
Foreign Language Instruction
Presenter: Michael Hubert, Washington State University, USA
Abstract: In order to describe the extent to which mainstream L2 writing theory is
utilized by U.S. university foreign language (FL) instructors, this paper reports the
results of a survey asking 1000 U.S. university FL professors to detail their
knowledge and implementation of several of the most important L2 writing theories.
K.1.2 Third Culture Identity Expressed in Online Communities: “Life is a Suitcase,
Half-Packed”
Presenter: Sonja Lind, University of California, Irvine, USA
Abstract: This paper explores intercultural identity in online spaces. Participants
were "Third Culture Kids," adults who were raised abroad. In an online TCK
50 SSLW 2009
community, participants posted sentences defining their “life in six words.” Text
analysis was conducted and emergent themes included feelings of displacement, loss,
and wonder and excitement.
K.1.3 The L2 Learner’s “Reduced Identity” in Writing
Presenter: Soomin Jwa, The University of Arizona, USA
Abstract: This study is designed to see how rhetorical choices reflect the negotiation
of voice construction and how consistent their expected identity is as perceived by
readers. The researcher explores the L2 learners’ ‘mis-constructed’ voices expressed
in firmer assertions in various aspects.
K.2 Saturday, November 7, 2:15-3:30, Lapaz East
Session Chair: Subrata Bhowmik, Arizona State University, USA
K.2.1 In Search for “Robust Knowledge”: L2 Writing Pedagogy in EFL Contexts
Presenter: Subrata Bhowmik, Arizona State University, USA
Abstract: The paper looks at the mismatch between current L2 writing theories and
their application in EFL contexts. Surveying literature on L2 writing in EFL contexts,
various contextual variables are discussed. It is argued that mainstream L2 writing
theories should integrate more research findings and theoretical discussions drawn
from EFL contexts.
K.2.2 Cultivation of a Mosaic: a Canadian Approach to Multilingualism
Presenter: Julia Kiernan, University of Louisville, USA
Abstract: Despite Canada’s self-description as not a melting pot—but a mosaic of
diversity—citizen diversity is not always cultivated. This presentation will draw upon
ethnographic research collected from students enrolled in first-year writing at the
University of Windsor, Canada and discuss how the researcher and the student
participants see the many languages and cultures of Canada colliding and manifesting
in students’ writing and students’ perceptions of their writing ability.
K.2.3 From the Border: Latino/a Graduate Education Students Writing Their Way
into the Academy
Presenters: Kerrie Kephart, University of Texas at El Paso, USA
Erika Mein, University of Texas at El Paso, USA
Ana Huerta-Macias, University of Texas at El Paso, USA
Abstract: To many beginning graduate students, native- and non-native speakers
alike, academic discourses seem foreign, and scholarly writing is mysterious. Yet
graduate curricula rarely explicitly teach the values, expectations, and key genres of
disciplinary discourse communities. In this presentation we describe the origins,
approach, challenges, and impact of a course in scholarly writing for graduate
students in education that is designed to address this gap.
Saturday, November 7 51
K.3 Saturday, November 7, 2:15-3:30, Gold
Session Chair: Jimmy Fleming, Bedford/St. Martin's Press
Discussion Session: Writing Textbooks
Presenter: Jimmy Fleming, Bedford/St. Martin's Press
Plenary IV – Saturday, November 7, 4:00-4:45, Arizona
Second-Language Writing Research Across the Generations: It's All in the Family
Chair:
Sarah Hudelson, Arizona State University, USA
Presenters: Carole Edelsky, Arizona State University, USA (Emerita)
Gail Shuck, Boise State University, USA
Abstract: Edelsky and Shuck will present a view of research on second language
writing across 30 years. This mother-daughter pair will examine how some of the
theoretical frameworks and research questions have shifted from “Then” to “Now”
and how some frameworks and questions persist. They will look together and
separately at a sample of second-language writing using various Then and Now
lenses—how would mama Carole have analyzed the sample close to the beginning of
her career, and how would daughter Gail analyze the same sample now, near the
beginning of her own career? What lenses would they bring to bear? To what extent
would their research questions move beyond the writing of individual students and
what frameworks would they draw on to do so? Relying on fluid notions of Then and
Now, they will ask questions such as these: How does scholarship Now challenge
scholarship Then? What does Now owe to Then? What was Then reaching for but
couldn’t quite grasp because Now hadn’t yet happened? Woven through each analytic
“take” will be references to—and sometimes longer discussions of—such issues as
context, genre, discourses, normativity, identity, language ideologies, and institutional
practices.
Closing Ceremony – Saturday, November 7, 4:45-5:00, Arizona
To the Future of Second Language Writing
Chair:
Paul Kei Matsuda, Arizona State University, USA
Presenter: William Grabe, Northern Arizona University, USA
52 SSLW 2009
53
Parlor Press Series on
Second Language Writing
Series Editor
Paul Kei Matsuda
Arizona State University
Second language writing emerged in the late twentieth century as an interdisciplinary field of
inquiry, and an increasing number of researchers from various related fields—including applied
linguistics, communication, composition studies, and education—have come to identify
themselves as second language writing specialists. The Second Language Writing series aims to
facilitate the advancement of knowledge in the field of second language writing by publishing
scholarly and research-based monographs and edited collections that provide significant new
insights into central topics and issues in the field.
This Series seeks submissions that expand, refine or challenge the existing knowledge in the
field by using various modes of inquiry, such as philosophical, historical, empirical (quantitative
and qualitative) and narrative. Some of the possible topics include, but are not limited to:









the nature, backgrounds, and characteristics of second or foreign language writing and writers;
issues in second language writing instruction, assessment, and program administration;
the experience of second language writers, writing teachers, and writing program administrators;
institutional policies, politics, and practices that affect second language writers;
instructional practices in various institutional and disciplinary contexts;
implications of technological innovations on second language writing;
the relevance of theories developed in other fields;
the definition and historical development of the field and its relationship with other fields; and
approaches to inquiry in studying second language writing and writers.
Manuscripts that explore the implications of second language writing issues in other related
fields are also welcome. Following the common practice in the field, submissions to this Series
should follow the current APA style.
Queries should be directed to: Paul Kei Matsuda, Arizona State University, Department of
English, Box 870302, Tempe, AZ 85287-0302 USA, Email: pmatsuda@asu.edu.
For complete submission guidelines, see: http://www.parlorpress.com/submissions
Books in the Series
Practicing Theory in Second Language Writing edited by Tony Silva and Paul Kei Matsuda
(forthcoming)
Building Genre Knowledge by Christine M. Tardy (2009)
The Politics of Second Language Writing: In Search of the Promised Land edited by Paul Kei
Matsuda, Christina Ortmeier-Hooper and Xiaoye You (2006)