School of Languages and Linguistics - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 10 of 25
-
ItemNo Preview AvailableThe AICCM Bulletin, Volume 37.1 Editorial(Informa UK Limited, 2016-01-02)
-
ItemMultiple perspectives on group work in a multilingual context(John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2022)Abstract: Group assignments are widely used in higher education for a range of educational reasons. Although there is a large body of research on the merits of group work and factors that may contribute to successful group work, less is known about students’ and teachers’ perspectives, particularly when groups are composed of students from diverse linguistic backgrounds. The current qualitative study investigated students’ and teachers’ perspectives on group assignments in a Master of Applied Linguistics program offered by a leading research university in Australia. The program has predominantly English as an additional language (EAL) students. Teachers and students in four graduate subjects that involved group assignments were interviewed for their views and reflections. Analysis of the interview data revealed similarities and differences in perspectives in five main areas – group work benefits and challenges, group formation and assessment, and the need for pre-implementation training. The findings highlight the need for teachers to promote open discussion about the purposes and merits of group work, both pedagogical and social.
-
ItemComparing the Same Task in ESL vs. EFL Learning Contexts: An Activity Theory Perspective(Wiley, 2019-07-11)This classroom-based study examined the role of context in task-based interaction. Identical tasks were implemented in university-level classes in two contexts: Australian ESL (n = 27) and Chilean EFL (n = 19). The learners engaged in discussion tasks, as part of the regular classroom activities. Data included audio-recorded task-based interactions, observations, and a survey. Data analysis was guided by activity theory, examining how learners approached the tasks, including deliberations about language (actions), the group dynamics, and their use of mediating tools (e.g., L1). Our findings revealed differences in the learners' actions in these two contexts, both expected (e.g., use of L1) and unexpected (e.g., the nature of assistance provided). Our study shows that in different contexts, the same tasks represent different learning activities.
-
ItemDeveloping an authorial voice in PhD multilingual student writing: The reader's perspective(PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD, 2019-03)Most scholars agree about the importance of an authorial voice in academic writing. There is also a growing body of research on how voice is manifested in texts at a word and phrase level, but relatively little that investigates readers’ perceptions of authorial voice (the effect on the reader) or the development of voice over time. In our study, we explored these issues by eliciting the views of five supervisors as they read and evaluated authorial voice, in the texts of three PhD students, writing in English as an additional language (EAL). We used two sets of comparable texts written by the students relatively early and near the end of their PhD to address the issue of voice development. A thematic analysis of the transcribed interviews revealed what constituted evidence of authorial voice for the five expert readers. All were adamant that an authorial voice is crucial in the writing of PhD students, but found the task of defining and locating voice in the students’ texts, and in discerning progress in students’ abilities to articulate a convincing authorial voice very challenging. Of interest was the finding that the supervisors’ language backgrounds, disciplinary specialities, personal histories, and preferences shaped their impressions of voice. These differences in perceptions of what voice entails held by supervisors from the same broad discipline raise questions about how we approach the teaching and assessment of voice.
-
ItemStudents' Accounts of Their First-Year Undergraduate Academic Writing Experience: Implications for the Use of the CEFR(ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD, 2018)This article addresses the suitability of the CEFR as the basis for decisions about the readiness of individuals to engage in academic writing tasks in undergraduate university courses, and as a guide to progress. The CEFR offers potentially relevant general scales and subscales, but also more specific subscales for writing in the academic context. However, recent challenges to traditional views of academic writing have potential implications for assessment frameworks such as the CEFR when they are used to identify readiness for, and progress in, academic study. In this article we explore the views of students on what it means to “do” academic writing. Questionnaires, interviews, and short reflective texts were used to investigate the changing perceptions of first-year undergraduate students at an Australian university. The analysis of student data confirms the reality of the more complex view of academic writing suggested by the recent literature. The article then considers what implications this has for the adequacy of the definitions provided in the CEFR. It suggests that the CEFR descriptors underrepresent the complexity of the challenges of academic writing, particularly its cognitive demands. A new and rather different approach will be required to inform assessments used to manage the admission of students in`to academic writing contexts and the monitoring of their progress.
-
ItemClaire Kramsch: Language as Symbolic Power(Oxford University Press (OUP), 2022-06)
-
ItemContext matters: Learner beliefs and interactional behaviors in an EFL vs. ESL context(SAGE Publications, 2020-05-27)Researchers and teachers often invoke context to explain their particular research/teaching issues. However, definitions of context vary widely and the direct impact of the context is often unexplained. Based on research showing contextual differences in second language (L2) learner beliefs and interactional behaviors, the current project compared those factors in two distinct contexts: Chilean English as a foreign language (EFL) (n = 19) and Australian English as a second language (ESL) (n = 27) contexts. In this project, the learners completed a set of group discussion activities as part of their regular class work. They then completed a questionnaire pertaining to L2 motivation, perceptions of group work, and first language (L1) use. The group interaction data were analysed for: (1) the frequency of language-related episodes (LREs); (2) the initiator of LREs (self or other); and (3) L1 use for resolving LREs. The results showed that the EFL learners produced significantly more LREs. The EFL learners also used more L1 to resolve LREs. Factor analyses of the questionnaire data, conducted within- and across-contexts, showed notable differences in the two contexts as well. However, the findings of learner beliefs did not necessarily account for the differential classroom behaviors. We discuss our findings by reference to the socio-linguistic and socio-educational statuses of English in the two contexts as well as approaches to instruction which together shaped the learners’ differential needs and purposes for learning the L2.
-
ItemThe Effect of Sustained Teacher Feedback on CAF, Content and Organization in EFL Writing(Urmia University, 2020-06-01)Despite teachers' mainstream practices in L2 writing classrooms addressing different dimensions of writing over time, much of the research on feedback in recent years has been of relative short duration and has mainly focused on accuracy. The current longitudinal study investigated the influence of sustained teacher written feedback on accuracy, syntactic complexity, fluency, content, and organization in an EFL context. Ninety-two learners were divided into four groups, receiving written corrective feedback, feedback on content and organization, multilateral feedback (i.e., on grammatical accuracy, content, and organization), and no feedback over a 3½-month period. They completed a pre-test, post-test, and delayed post-test and wrote and revised eight interim expository compositions on a weekly basis. Results showed that the three treatment groups significantly improved in the dimensions on which they received feedback. However, only the groups who received feedback on content and organization improved in fluency. Importantly, the multilateral group improved in accuracy as well as fluency, content and organization. Theoretically, the findings endorse the language learning potentials of sustained writing as long as it is guided by teacher feedback. The findings provide empirical support for the influence of sustained feedback on expanding and consolidating learners’ explicit knowledge of L2 writing.
-
ItemLess is more? The impact of written corrective feedback on corpus-assisted L2 error resolution(Elsevier, 2020-09-01)The past decade has seen a sharp increase in research into L2 learners’ direct use of language corpora (typically known as ‘data-driven learning’, DDL) for error resolution in L2 writing. However, a crucial yet underexplored variable in this process is whether and how the form of written corrective feedback (WCF) provided on L2 writing facilitates effective corpus consultation for L2 error resolution. Focusing on L2 writers at the post-graduate level and using a short private online course for DDL training, we determine the impact of four WCF conditions (varying in their degree of directness) on students’ use of corpora for lexical and grammatical error resolution, and the appropriacy of error revisions made with/without corpora for these error types. The results suggest that ‘less (WCF) is more’ if learners are to make successful error revisions via corpus consultation, with more direct WCF conditions often resulting in students revising errors without consulting a corpus. However, less direct WCF conditions sometimes resulted in inappropriate revisions, as learners required additional information as to the nature and location of the specific error. Differences were also found in the effectiveness of corpus consultation for grammatical and lexical error types, with WCF a confounding factor. These results suggest that if corpora are to be used for L2 error resolution, teachers need to carefully consider whether their WCF allows for meaningful engagement with corpora to occur, and whether corpus consultation is suitable or desirable for resolving all error types.
-
ItemBecoming an applied linguist A study of authorial voice in international PhD students' confirmation reports(JOHN BENJAMINS PUBLISHING CO, 2016)The need to establish an authorial identity in academic discourse has been considered to be critical for all doctoral students by academic writing teachers and researchers for some time. For students for whom English is an additional language (EAL) in particular, the challenges are not only how to communicate this identity effectively in English, but also how to develop from a writer who simply ventriloquizes the voices of scholarly others to an author who writes with authority and discipline-specific rhetorical knowledge. In the current project, we explored how three EAL students constructed authorial voices through the use of personal and impersonal forms of self-representation and evaluative stance in the Introduction sections of their written PhD Confirmation Reports. Our findings indicate that students combined a complex range of linguistic and rhetorical resources, such as integral and non-integral attribution of sources and attitudinal markers of stance, in their quest to project credible authorial identities as Applied Linguists. We also discovered the effect of these resources on readers to be cumulative. We recommend further research, including interviews with students, supervisors and examiners from across the disciplines, to explore and extend the scope of the present study.