Stephen van Vlack
Sookmyung Women`s University
Graduate School of TESOL
Teaching Writing - Fall 2004
Answers for Scott (1996), Chapter 3: Writing and Computers (Week 4)
1. What are some of the main ways that computers could be expected to help students in their foreign language writing?
According to Scott (1996) there appear to be five main ways in which we can expect computers in general to help students in a foreign language writing process. They are:
Help students focus their attention on one thing
One thing that we, in the short time that we've been writing, have been exposed to it is that writing requires attention focused on a very diverse scale. During the process of writing writers need to think about and focus their attention on a multitude of different things, none of which are easy when taken alone much less in the humongous context of writing. A good computer program will allow a writer to focus their attention on a specific area of the writing process or other aspect of writing thus ensuring that they do that one thing as well as they can. For example, a computer program should be able to help people plan by creating templates wherein ideas can be pushed as well as supply mechanisms for moving ideas around so that they can be better arranged or discarded in a more easy fashion. Computer programs therefore can be extremely effective in allowing writers to do one thing at a time and hopefully do it well. Whenever one is trying to do to more than one thing at the same time it often leads to writing meltdown where many aspects of the writing do suffer since full attention is paid to none.
Affective assistance - make writing more fun
In my own brief review of some of the computer-based writing help available online when I found was the greatest help that many of these programs provided was not only to allow users to focus but in a more general sense simply made writing less miserable. One thing about computer programs is they can be interactive. This means that we can enjoy interacting with computers even when were doing something as laborious as writing. Inherent in this idea is also what was mentioned above that in many of these computer programs we can only do one thing at the time or one thing in general. Many of these computer programs focus on word level or sentence level writing. There's very little out there for composing that is interactive and affectively pleasing, but there have been some very good and successful attempts at doing this at a lower level. In this respect computer programs are an invaluable tool to getting students used to writing and enjoying it.
Help them find more ideas
One thing about computer programs which should be clear to us is that they make many ideas available and this often occurs through interface with the Internet or an accompanying encyclopedia type program. As we stated in class one thing that often prohibits good writing, and this is not simply true for second-language writers but is definitely more true for second-language writers, is topic knowledge. When writers, particularly non-native writers, are confronted with a topic they don't know about they often simply panic and their writing turns out to be much less successful it should be. Through an efficient use of computers writers should be able to dig up the information they need to write with a certain amount of authority on almost any topic. The tricky part, however, is to try to get our students to resist the temptation to simply plagiarize things from other sources.
Draw attention to the writing process
By only handling one thing at a time one thing that computer programs do often by default is draw the writer's attention to different stages in the writing process. Hopefully, a good computer program focused on writing will follow some of the basic ideas of the writing process in guiding people through different stages in which they need to write. This of course is implying that there is some degree of linearity in the writing process and we know that this is a debated issue but by drawing attention to the process and some of the stages in the process in a more covert way we are training our students to be more independent writers which is ultimately what we need to do.
Can provide help with structures
The best way that computer programs can help students be better writers is through tool interfaces. Many of these tool interfaces relate to things like vocabulary, grammar, and other aspects of the micro or form level of language. This is done with writing programs by either marking things that seemed to be a mistake or by allowing interface into databases and other programs that contain useful information for second-language writers, as we saw in the case of Systeme-D. This can be quite important for second-language writers who do need a lot more form based information in order to improve their writing and while such information is available outside computers it is certainly a time-saving device to have them available through a quick and efficient interface.
2. What are some of the major aspects of standard writing programs (MS Word, for example) that can help your students in their writing?
These should be pretty familiar to you since you need to use computers on a daily basis for a whole host of different reasons. Basically decent things that you can access under the tools bar in your standard word processing program.
Spell check
Grammar check
Thesaurus
Cut and paste
Drag
Undo
Hyperlink
.......more.......
3. What aspects of computer programs can help student with the writing process?
The most common thought on which aspects of computers can help the writing process usually revolves around what people are most familiar with and this is usually word processing programs which people think that are designed to mostly help in the revision process. It should be kept in mind that there are lots of computer programs that also help in the writing process by providing interfaces such as vocabulary building interfaces, grammar interfaces and interfaces containing encyclopedic types of knowledge. In the same vein computer programs which have links to large stores of information also help in the planning process so they really help in all different ways.
4. How can you use vast resources like the Internet to help your students with the writing process?
The Internet is a huge resource containing a wealth of resources containing all the different kinds of programs mentioned above in addition to forums for online publication and real writing exchanges. All too often people think of the Internet only as a source of information, but in reality it contains a huge variety of different types of resources many of which could be pivotal in the teaching and effective use of writing, particularly for non-native writers who often don't get a chance to use writing in more real world type circumstances. The Internet can bring the real world closer to us through classics changes online publication as well as more interactive type of writing activities. Based on this use of the Internet seems to be highly valued in the teaching and execution of writing.
Questions for Friedlander (1990)
5. What is the major claim that Freidlander wishes to make?
Friedlander`s claim is a simple one.
Foreign language writers can make good use if their L1 in the L2 writing process under certain conditions.
I think we can all understand this without any difficulty. The point that needs to be dealt with it is what is meant by certain circumstances. This needs to be defined and explored and we do this in the somewhat extended discussion below.
6. What theory is this claim based on?
Friedlander's claim is based on a simple and widely reported phenomenon that memories are contextually highly sensitive. This means that if you are exposed to something or learn something in a certain context it is better dealt with later on in that same context. This should be pretty clear particularly when we extended it into the realm of language. Events that have been experienced in a specific language like Korean and are tightly bound to Korean are probably much better off dealt with through that medium of Korean and not some other language. The idea is that memories are/may be coated in certain linguistic forms and certainly they are associated with certain linguistic forms. That is the basic idea which forms the basis of Friedlander's claim.
Theories of memory storage and language interface with composition because composition is about ideas. Without good, clear ideas there is no good, clear writing. Ideas are linguistically embedded so we as language/writing teachers want to encourage our students to use the appropriate language at least in the planning stages of idea formulation.
7. Does his data support his hypothesis? Explain.
Yes. What Friedlander basically found was that writers who plan in the language which is more closely related to the topic wind up with a better piece of writing overall. To make the claim stronger Friedlander also found that people who planned in the language which did not match the topic area closely through the real world experience wound up producing pieces of writing which were less adequate overall. Thus his study clearly shows that the premise is in fact borne out.
8. What are some of the teaching implications of his study?
Let the students use their L1 in the L2 classroom under certain conditions.
All too often as foreign language teachers we are quite consistent in the rule that our students only use target language in class. Of course, there are very good reasons for doing this and I won't argue against this as a general principle for speaking development, but bear in mind that writing and speaking are different and require different levels of cognitive processing. A simple fact we now know about memory and writing is that it seems appropriate to try to let students use some of their L-1 in the L2 writing process, again under certain circumstances. This is borne out in Friedlander's study.
At the same time we probably need to take this whole idea little further since we are teachers in Korea and our students might not actually have very good knowledge of writing in their L-1. Based on claims that L-1 and NL writing proficiency are very closely linked we probably need to think about developing both in tandem since our students are probably deficient in both. This means that at least when we are writing there needs to be some said integration between Korean and English. It was mentioned in the beginning of this course that one of the things we need to try to do for writing is to enhance transfer and that writing is the perfect place to expect more positive types of transfer. Get your students used to that. There should be no sharp or punishable distinction between Korean an English in some of the ways we handle writing with them. Forming and enforcing such ridiculous distinctions only inhibits any kind of possible transfer.
Highlights from Friedlander (1990) Composing in English
Quote 1
̋Students who have not developed good strategies for writing in their first language will not have appropriate strategies to transfer to their second language.̋
What this tells us is that we, as teachers, need to know how much the students know about writing in their first language. By writing we are not talking so much about micro level features like grammar and spelling as we are about macro levels like planning and structuring. As teachers, we need to be aware that the macro-level processes are often similar across languages. Don`t be afraid in an English classroom to use what the students know about Korean writing to help them with English.
One of the problems we face as teachers of English who want to develop the writing skills of our students is that often they have not been taught writing essentials in their first language. This makes our job doubly hard. Not only do we have to teach our students basic writing, but we have to do this in a foreign language. This means that to begin to attempt doing anything above the sentence level, our students have to have good listening and speaking, not to mention reading proficiency in the language. The problem here is that writing becomes a very demotivating for these students. Their writing level is much lower than their other skill areas, so they become frustrated with it easily. In this case, the use of Korean can help a bit, especially that in using Korean teachers can introduce their students to writing earlier and hope to equalize skill proficiencies so that a tremendous imbalance does not develop.
Korean is not taboo. Use it, but don`t let it interfere with the learning of English. After all, our intention is not just to teach writing, but raise general English proficiency as well. This means that overt explanations can be done in Korean, but the focus still needs to be on the language they produce.
Quote 2
̋ Writing knowledge transfers across languages.̋
This is simply a reformation of the quote above. We can generalize it by saying good writers in Korean will also usually be good writers in English. Bad writers in Korean will probably be bad in English, too. Know your students and you will know how to level and gauge your lessons. This sounds really nice and is designed to raise our morale as beleaguered teachers, but I am not sure it is true. The situation of the perceived social and linguistic distance between Korean and English is the culprit here. In my experience, people from both sides of the cultural/linguistic expanse believe that Korean and English are totally dissimilar. It is hard for students to imagine a whole series of similarities between the two. As a result, in a situation where they are left to assume things for themselves (as described or even advocated by Friedlander) most student seem to opt for the extreme distance scenario.
A perfect example if this in writing is formatting. Inexperienced writers (at least those I have encountered here in Korea) are infamous for not being able to even format properly in English. They do no t write paragraphs that look like paragraphs. They do not indent and worse, they skip to the next line after each sentence and do not follow any kind of consistent rules about margins and spacing. This is extremely interesting and often puzzling because Korean format is basically the same as formatting for English. These students would never hand in a report written in Korean that was so formatted. Likewise, these same students have not only been exposed to this format, but have also been exposed to and read countless paragraphs in English, all of which must have been properly formatted.
More interesting is how fossilized their incorrect format can be. Even upon repeated direct instruction of formatting complete with examples and diagrams, some students will persist in formatting their paragraphs in an incorrect way.
Writing knowledge, and indeed general linguistic knowledge, transfers across languages only when the society supports it and when the individual student has the learning styles and strategies to support that transfer. There are tremendous differences in this phenomenon even among languages that are very close. I have seen this with astonishing results in English and Portuguese speakers learning German both in and out of the TL environment.
We as teachers need to foster and overexpose the connections between languages to get all our students to be able to see them and really embrace them meaningfully.
Quote 3
̋Traditional approaches to writing, such as modes of discourse or grammar-based approaches, falter because they do not help students see writing as an evolutionary process.̋
What the author is trying to tell us here is that we should focus on a process approach to writing. We, however, know that this depends on our course goals and the amount of class time we can devote only to writing. In general, however, it is good advice. It is important to let the students know that writing is not something that begins and ends suddenly. It is an ongoing process of constant revision and rethinking. The process approach also takes the students from the very beginning to the very end. It fosters independence in writing, so that the students can go out of the classroom and do things on their own.
Traditional approaches only take the student to a certain level. There is no evidence that upon achieving that level they will cross some magical threshold line and be able to do the rest themselves. Practice with organization above the sentence level is absolutely necessary for real writing to develop. Also, writing is something which must be done without the teacher, for eventually the students will have to write all manner of texts by themselves. They need to develop meaningful strategies for doing so.
Quote 4
̋If ESL writers retrieve information about a writing topic from memory in their first language and then have to translate into English before writing anything down, this act of translation can lead to an overload of their short-term memory and a diminishment in the quality of the content of the writing.̋
Friedlander claims that this is not true. His position is that translation of ideas from first into second language is OK. When we run into problems with our students, however, is when they start to write in their first language and then have to translate everything into English. It is at this point that the short-term memory becomes overloaded because it is stuck doing the same thing in two languages. Terrible!! Looking at it from another side, if they plan in English, translating from Korean, the essay might be very dull and badly organized because their minds are focussing on other things. One way to avoid this is to use a step approach.
I do not see any problem with students brainstorming and planning in Korean, but like Friedlander, I am dead set against students writing first in their L1 And then translating into the TL. First of all, it`s a phenomenal waste of time. Second, good translation is a highly advanced skill. The students that are doing this are doing this because they do not have confidence in their English skill. Translation entails being able to change points and concepts from one linguistic code to another. It is not the substitution of translation equivalents. We now have computer programs that can do this and the result is incomprehensible drivel which does not fit the modes of the target language.
Yes, it is true that translation will overtax the short-term memory, this making it hard for the student to write well, but that is a moot problem because these people cannot write well to begin with. If they knew how to write in English, they would not have to use Korean as a crutch.
As mentioned briefly above, students who are inclined to do this should be encouraged to write in English only, but in a series of related but mutually exclusive steps. This will allow them to focus on only one thing at a time. For example, they make a list of all the sentences they ca think of first and then drop some and add some. Next, they order them. Then, they can add in transitional expressions to make the writing flow well. This allows them to think of norms in the TL for just one criteria. Writing occurs on many levels. Good writing has to match the TL norms for all these levels. It is more than simply getting the words right.
Quote 5
̋The greater the number of switches into the first language, the better the quality of the essays in terms of organization and ideas.̋
Yes, this is generally true as long as the writer is rather advanced and is actually writing the main part of the text in the second language. The point is, learners need to find a balance between using the first language effectively to help them with topics, ideas, and even vocabulary items and having the first language interfere. If interference occurs, the final product will end up weaker, especially at the micro-level. As EFL teachers this is our greatest concern; getting the students to do their writing in English. If left too much to their own devices students will invariably take the easy path and fall back on their L1. We have to try to get them to develop strategies in using the L2. One way of doing so is giving them writing topics and assignments that are very closely related to their L2 experience and far from their L1 experience.
Quote 6
̋Positive transfer of first language-related content will be enhanced when writers write using the language in which the information was acquired.̋
This is a very important statement. It points to the fact that, in second language learners, much of their knowledge will be contained in the first language portion of their brain. It then becomes clear that all bilinguals have two parts to their brains and each one holds some specific pieces of knowledge. It also says we tend to equate certain situations with a certain language, but this relies in part on the level of proficiency in that language. There is, of course transfer between the two parts of the brain. Much information, however, can be lost as we filter ideas from one part of the brain through the other.
Quote 7
̋Writing about the topic related to their first language resulted in superior texts.̋
This merely strengthens the assumptions we made based on the quote above. It also tells us that we should always have our students write about something they have experienced when they were in their first language environment, maybe even when they were young. For most students the first language part of the brain is stronger and more useful and, therefore, should be used more.
Quote 8
̋Using a first language appears to allow better retrieval of ideas, irrespective of the language of the topic knowledge.̋
The idea behind this is that we should let our students do some initial planning in their first language, Korean. Use of Korean in the initial stages of writing will result in a better text. By thinking first in their first language, the students will not be at all limited by lack of grammar or vocabulary. This seems to hold true even when the topic is tied to the second language.
Quote 9
̋Some studies indicate that when students write on topics for which their knowledge is ̀well-integrated̀ (Langer 1984:28), and in which they are highly involved (Bridgeman and Carlson 1984), organization of their writing is likely to be superior to essays produced on topics for which their knowledge is less secure.̋
This is the perfect argument for using meaningful material in class. If we pick topics that all the students know a lot about, not only will they be more interested in our class, but they will do better in their studies as well. The idea is that something that is ingrained in our heads is easier to access than something that is new or less familiar. The more we think about something the easier it is to think about it. The rule is this: pick familiar topics.
Quote 10
̋Certain topic-area information, particularly culturally based information, seems to be more easily accessed through a very brief cue.̋
This is a further note on the above quote. The idea is that if we are very familiar with a certain topic and have thought about it a fair bit, we will have already summarized it in our brain. What this means for writing is that planning is not only easier, but also more efficient when we use culturally-based topics with which the students are very familiar. We do not have to grope for words to describe something we are very familiar with.
Quote 11
̋In this case, if writers are writing on topics related to their first language experience, their writing should be assisted and they should be able to draw on a greater amount of topic area information if they create a portion of their plan or preliminary draft in their first language. Second, translation from the native language into English appears to help rather than hinder writers when the topic area is in their first language.̋
This is a summarization of all the points we have had to date. Be careful about the translating part. Translating ideas is OK, depending on the level of the student. Translating entire paragraphs is often problematic. It can lead to terrible grammar and stylistics related problems, some of which are very hard for teachers to fix.
Quote 12
̋In such writing situations, ESL writers should be encouraged to use their first language while composing initial drafts. Looking at this idea from an opposite angle, if teachers want their students to avoid their first language and use English as much as possible, then they should try to avoid assigning topics related to their students` first language background.̋
I`m not so sure I would go so far as to have the students compose the first draft in their native language unless their level is fairly high. It all depends on whether the teacher wants to focus on miro or macro level functions. It also depends on how much the teacher wishes to immerse the students in English. It is, of course, possible to teach an English class using little or no English with a good benefit in certain areas. In the absence of English the students will, however, fail to develop fluency. If part of what you want to do as a teacher is teach culture, you should focus on English-related topics and have them do almost everything in English. You don`t have to do this, though.