This study contributes to the emerging research on generative AI and writing pedagogy by exploring how college writing students make use of GAI when offered instruction in a range of responsible uses and latitude to integrate it into their writing process as they see fit. We analyzed chat log data and papers from participants recruited from six sections in which students were guided in experimenting with ChatGPT Plus and permitted to use it to produce up to 50% of submitted work. Through a combination of AI and human thematic content analysis of student chat logs, we found that in 18.6% of prompts, students asked ChatGPT to write for them. The rest of the prompts involved work leading up to or in support of the writing process. Human thematic content analysis of papers showed that students used ChatGPT to generate 8.2% of the writing they submitted. The most common rhetorical purpose of the AI-generated text they included was discussion/analysis/synthesis. English as a foreign language students (EFLs) in the sample prompted ChatGPT to clarify understanding less often than non-EFLs and integrated less AI-generated text into their papers, with a particularly notable difference in their use of AI-generated summaries. This unexpected finding merits further research, but it suggests that EFLs may use GAI for somewhat different purposes than non-EFL peers.

Executive functions are attributed a central role in maintaining fluency during L2 text composition, allowing writers to orchestrate the various linguistic and cognitive processes and resources involved in writing. The study examined (1) whether language proficiency moderates the relationship between executive functions and writing fluency in L2 writing and (2) whether the effects indirectly affect text quality. Sixty university students composed two texts in English as their L2, an argumentation and a description, three executive function tasks assessing inhibition, shifting, and updating skills, a language proficiency test, and a copy task. Keystroke logging protocols were recorded with Inputlog and analyzed for writing fluency. Text quality was assessed with a holistic benchmark procedure and comparative judgments. The results revealed language-dependent and genre-specific effects of updating and shifting but not inhibition skills on writing fluency. Path models indicated that the interactions between executive functions and language proficiency indirectly affect text quality through process-related writing measures. The findings suggest a complex relation between executive functions and writing performance that depends on language proficiency and varies with task demands.

Despite the growing interest in the dynamics of the writing process in writing research, publicly available large-scale corpora of keystroke logs have been rare. We introduce KLiCKe, a freely available collection of keystroke logs for around 5,000 argumentative texts written by adults in the United States. The KLiCKe corpus also includes human-rated holistic scores for the essays as well as writers' demographic details, their typing skills, and vocabulary knowledge. We describe our methods for constructing the corpus and present descriptives for different components of the corpus. To illustrate the use of the KLiCKe corpus, we report a study using a subset of the corpus to investigate whether keystroke features are associated with holistic writing quality for L1 and L2 writers. The study shows that higher writing scores are related to shorter pauses in general, shorter between-word pauses, lower proportion of deletions, higher proportion of insertions, and less process variance. The KLiCKe corpus provides a robust resource for researchers to study the dynamics of text production and revision that will help spur the development of process-oriented tools and methodologies in writing assessment and instruction.

This article reports on a scoping review of the literature exploring the alignment between behavioral and linguistic units in L1 and L2 writing. Behavioral units in writing were assessed using keystroke logging measures of pauses, bursts, and revisions. Linguistic units were operationalized based on lexical and syntactic definitions from the literature. Nine empirical studies met the inclusion criteria. Most of these studies focused on L1 English writing by adult participants, although some explored other first languages, such as German, Dutch, and French. The identified L2 studies focused exclusively on English. Due to the limited number and high heterogeneity of the studies, no definitive conclusions can be drawn. However, meaningful links between behavioral and linguistic units were detected. In addition to confirming some previously known phenomena, the studies provided new evidence on online processing during pauses, revealed certain idiosyncrasies in L1 versus L2 writing cognition, and offered new insights into the nature of revision. We provide a critical interpretation of the results, propose new research directions, and recommend solutions.

This study investigates how pausing behaviour within a writing session is associated with the writer's language proficiency, focusing on Finnish and Swedish as both first language (L1) and learner language (L2). The data were collected through keyboard logging software and evaluated using CEFR-based assessments of the resulting texts. The relationship was analysed using ordinal mixed-effects logistic regression modelling, where proficiency is modelled as a function of various variables related to pausing behaviour. The results show that the L2 writing process reflects the writer's proficiency. However, there is a significant difference between L2 writers of Swedish and L2 writers of Finnish compared to L1 writers. The advanced L2 writers of Swedish behave similarly to the L1 Swedish writers. In contrast, even the most advanced L2 writers of Finnish have pause lengths and linguistic contexts that are more similar to the less advanced L2 writers than the L1 writers. In addition, the pauses between words do not indicate any clear proficiency-related patterning, leaving only within-word pauses as a robust indicator of proficiency, especially in Swedish. Unlike most writing process research, this study's parallel design allows for contrasting two typologically diverging languages while controlling for other contextual variables. Future studies could explore the grammatical nature of pause locations across the analysed languages.

This paper investigated the impact of direct unfocused written corrective feedback (WCF) on EFL students’ writing improvement, self-efficacy, and anxiety. To this aim, 52 Iranian male learners were selected as participants by using the Oxford Placement Test and randomly placed in an experimental and a control group. The participants completed a pre-test that included a writing task, the writing self-efficacy questionnaire (WSEQ), and the Second Language Writing Anxiety Inventory (SLWAI) to assess their writing skill, writing self-efficacy, and writing anxiety, respectively. Having attended 15 sessions of writing instruction in which only the experimental group received WCF, the participants again completed a writing task, the WSEQ, and the SLWAI in the posttest procedure. The results showed that the experimental group outperformed the control group in all three constructs, indicating that WCF has a positive impact on EFL students’ writing performance, self-efficacy, and anxiety. Implications of the study are presented.

As project-based learning (PjBL) has become very popular in education over the past few years, this study conducted a comprehensive meta-analysis to synthesize the effectiveness of PjBL in EFL/ESL writing by examining 11 articles based on databases of Scopus and Google Scholar from 2013 to 2023. The result reveals that PjBL had a significant positive effect size in EFL/ESL writing. Moreover, the effect sizes of some moderating variables were analyzed, including educational levels, sample size, research design, intervention duration, and group size. It was found that the most important moderating variable that affects the effectiveness of PjBL in EFL/ESL writing is intervention duration. The significant overall effect of PjBL on ESL/EFL writing implies the need for educators to consider using PjBL in language teaching and learning. Meanwhile future researchers might consider applying other moderating variables such as research design, instructional strategies, and student characteristics, to identify the best practices for implementing PjBL in ESL/EFL writing.

Writing processes constitute a complex interplay of planning, formulation and revision. Ideas take shape through the activation of previous knowledge and, when permitted, also its synthesis with information from sources that help to complement it and resolve doubts and shortcomings arising during writing. The possibility to use external help can be especially useful to those writing in a foreign language, and questions about the nature of the sources consulted can contribute new insights into language processing in the multilingual mind, as well as expand our notion of fluency. While leaving the target text is often considered a distraction, a ‘breakdown’ in fluency, it is, in fact, a part of language processing and text creation.       This article proposes a novel way to use keylogging data from Inputlog (Leijten and Van Waes 2013) to visualise the crosslinguistic nature of solving language and content problems in L3+ writing: creating process graphs to display the temporal dynamics of different types of sources used. The example data comes from a university-level course on Spanish linguistics, where Spanish was a third or subsequent language for the participants. Evidently, the vast majority of their external activity was language-related and brief, and, interestingly, a great part of it recurs to a lingua franca, English. Some social context and reasoning is offered to explain such an observation.

Advanced technology has brought about great changes to language teaching and learning, such as significant shifts and requirements in the field of writing, which is considered as a complex ability to acquire, especially for second language (L2) learners (Hyland, 2021). Writing in this digital era has been shaped by various new technologies, resulting in more attention paid to technology use in L2 writing instruction and research. A new collection of papers titled Technology in second language writing: Advances in composing, translation, writing pedagogy and data-driven learning has been timely published to illustrate how the L2 writing field embraces the integration of technology in teaching and researching students with various cultural backgrounds. This fascinating book was edited by Jingjing Qin and Paul Stapleton who gathered scholars with different pedagogical experiences to provide a comprehensive detour from original research orientations to pedagogical applications.

This study examines associations between writing behaviors manifested by keystroke analytics and the formulation of argument elements in L2 undergraduate writers' writing processes. Ninety-nine persuasive essays written by L2 undergraduate writers were human annotated for Toulmin argument elements. The corresponding keystroke logs were segmented and analyzed to characterize the dynamics of writing processes for different categories of the elements. A multinomial mixed-effects logistic regression model was built to predict argument categories using the keystroke analytics. The study reported that L2 undergraduate writers' text production for final claims and primary claims featured P-bursts (execution processes delimited by pauses exceeding 2 seconds) of longer spans but lower production fluency compared to that for data. In addition, fewer revisions were observed when L2 writers were constructing final claims than when they were formulating data. These findings shed light on the varying cognitive loads and activities L2 undergraduate writers may experience when building different argument elements in written argumentation.

Writing is challenging for international students, who often possess inadequate writing skills and are required to adapt to the new learning environment. Students’ approaches to learning have been shown to relate to some constructs of writing conceptions. Nevertheless, little research exists on the relationship between such conceptions and approaches to learning. This study explores writing conceptions, approaches to learning, and their interrelationship among international students. The data were collected from 162 international students at a research-intensive Finnish university using the HowULearn Questionnaire and the Writing Process Questionnaire. Data analysis included bivariate correlations, confirmatory factor analysis, t-test, latent profile analysis, and ANOVA tests. The results demonstrated how approaches to learning correlated with the writing conceptions of the participants. Three profiles were identified: deep and organised students (72.8%), deep and unorganised students (14.2%), and unreflective and unorganised students (13.0%). These profiles were statistically different in all writing conceptions, including blocks, procrastination, perfectionism, innate ability, knowledge transforming and productivity. Overall, students’ ability to reflect on their learning and organise their studying played an important role in their writing conceptions. Based on the findings, the study provides strategies for developing writing for international students and suggestions for enhancing teaching in host universities.

In this study, we examined how the explicit instructional use of paraphrasing guidelines can help international graduate students who are non-native English speakers to paraphrase information in text sources. This case study involved 14 graduate students enrolled in an academic writing class at a university in the northwest United States. Data were collected through seven sources: a background questionnaire, video of instruction, pretest, posttest, student task documents, stimulated recall interviews, and teacher interviews, which together addressed the three research questions. The data show that the participants’ perceptions of using the guidelines were positive and that their paraphrases in the posttest had improved according to the guidelines. The study concludes that the use of the guidelines should be accompanied by meaningful support through explicit instruction and sufficient practice over time. The implications of this study include recommendations for paraphrasing instruction and future research.

In 1966, more than 50 scholars from the UK, US, and Canada convened at Dartmouth College to discuss the state of the profession of English teaching, ultimately proposing a “growth” model of language learning which contrasted with the skills-based models of curriculum sequencing prevalent at the time. While debates about the impact of the 1966 Dartmouth conference on the teaching of English continue to ebb and flow, from contrasting early accounts by seminar participants (Muller, 1967; Dixon, 1969) to more modern work which situates the conference as a harbinger of the process movement (Trimbur, 2008) or Writing Across the Curriculum (Palmquist et al., 2020), its continued provocation of scholarly discussion has become a legacy in its own right. Even if the Dartmouth Seminar didn't change anything happening in the classrooms of its era and thereafter, which is unlikely (Harris, 1991), it would remain a rare moment of international, professional collaboration and consideration virtually unparalleled in our field's history.

In this study, we investigated which spelling cues are used in word-medial consonant spelling by learners of English as a Foreign Language (EFL). Previous research has shown that native speakers of English rely on different cues to decide whether a single (“diner”) or double consonant (“dinner”) needs to be used in word-medial consonant spelling. These cues include phonology, orthography, morphology and lexical frequency. We investigated whether these cues play a similar role in Dutch spellers who are EFL learners, next to similarity of the English target to Dutch. We analyzed dictation task data that was part of an unsupervised digital learning environment for EFL learning. The error analyses revealed that novice EFL spellers mainly used phonological and cross-linguistic cues in consonant doubling. In contrast, more proficient spellers relied less on phonological cues, and relied on morphological cues instead. The EFL spellers did not rely on orthographic cues. Furthermore, spelling difficulty was influenced by the frequency of a word and its similarity with the native-language equivalent, in terms of cognate status (non-cognate/cognate) and consonant doubling. Together, our findings indicate that a higher number of converging cues facilitates spelling for EFL spellers and that their reliance on cues changes as spelling proficiency increases.

The Routledge Handbook of Second Language Acquisition and Writing is a collection of research papers edited by Rosa M. Manchón and Charlene Polio. They aim to create a compendium that serves to contextualize and synthesize the development and research practices of the connection between second language (L2) writing and second language acquisition (SLA). The chapters of the collection feature theoretical perspectives and current empirical development on how and why L2 writing can be a meaningful site for language learning. Three reasons are formulated to articulate the significance of the volume concerning SLA-informed L2 writing studies: (1) research outcomes in this research domain are theoretically and empirically fruitful; (2) the theoretical contributions to the SLA knowledge are newly achieved; (3) L2 writing plays an indispensable role in instructed second language acquisition (ISLA) settings. By taking into account the socially situated nature of L2 writing teaching and learning, Manchón and Cerezo (2018) highlighted the substantial value of integrating L2 writing with SLA theories and research for both boosting the L2 learning process and advancing present and prospective SLA research agendas. Such an academic viewpoint appears to be predominant and invaluable in this collection with its theoretical advancements and practical insights contributed by authors from diverse educational settings.

Manchón, R. M. (Ed.). (2020). Writing and language learning: Advancing research agendas. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company | 432 pages ISBN: 9789027207746 | https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.

While the literature on the effect of comprehensive corrective feedback (CF) on
\noverall accuracy is abundant, the body of work employing such a scope to explore error
\ntreatability is not, especially when it comes to blended (cf. Ferris, 2010) design studies.
\nConsequently, this investigation extends the analyses from the data set of Bonilla et al.
\n(2018) to report on individual linguistic features. Specifically, to address crucial amenabilityrelated questions in need of perusal, the present blended design study explores the effect
\nof two types of comprehensive CF (with direct correction and metalinguistic codes) on the
\ntreatability of separate grammatical and non-grammatical structures. To this end, a group of
\nEFL learners (N = 139) were required to do editing that involved error-correction, deferred
\n(on a draft), and focused on language as well as to produce two independent essays (in an
\nimmediate and a delayed posttest). Main results from logistic regression (to test the effect
\nin revised essays) and mixed-effect models (to test the effect on independent essays)
\nrender seven variables that can explain correctability differences: out of those, three have
\nalso explained overall accuracy gains (cf. Bonilla et al., 2018), one has not been identified
\nthus far, and three consolidate themselves as relevant factors under other conditions as
\nwell. Theoretical and pedagogical implications are discussed.

Corpus linguistic methods can provide detailed and statistically robust information about how children's written language develops as they progress through their education. Such data can inform both models of written language development and curricular policies and practices. To this end, the current paper focuses on subordination as a key site of syntactic complexity. Using a corpus of 240 texts written by children aged 6 to 16 in England as part of their regular school work, it quantifies how the most common type of subordinate clause (the adverbial clause) varies across year groups and genres in terms of frequency, internal complexity and semantic function. A complex developmental picture emerges with length and frequency of finite vs. non-finite clauses changing in distinct ways across primary vs. secondary education. These patterns are found to be closely related to discipline- and genre-specific developments in the main functions for which adverbial clauses are used.

Expertise research spanning a variety of domains has established the central role that deliberate practice plays in developing expertise. This type of practice demands time, internal motivation, effort, feedback, and determination to surpass existing levels of performance. To leverage the rigors of deliberate practice, the two expert textbook writers who participated in this study deployed the writing processes of reviewing, writing it down, and incubating while developing textbooks for English language teaching (ELT). Data collected mainly via concurrent verbalization—whereby the participants expressed their thoughts aloud while engaged in textbook writing—and pre- and post-concurrent verbalization interviews revealed that the participants called upon these processes in purposeful ways as metacognitive strategies used to maximize writing effectiveness, with metacognition operationalized here as the participants’ knowledge and recognition of how they thought and worked. This study provides insight into how textbooks are written in practice and thus has implications for the research field of materials development; the findings also point to practical strategies that might be utilized by those who write language learning materials.

Expertise research spanning a variety of domains has established the central role that deliberate practice plays in developing expertise. This type of practice demands time, internal motivation, effort, feedback, and determination to surpass existing levels of performance. To leverage the rigors of deliberate practice, the two expert textbook writers who participated in this study deployed the writing processes of reviewing, writing it down, and incubating while developing textbooks for English language teaching (ELT). Data collected mainly via concurrent verbalization—whereby the participants expressed their thoughts aloud while engaged in textbook writing—and pre- and post-concurrent verbalization interviews revealed that the participants called upon these processes in purposeful ways as metacognitive strategies used to maximize writing effectiveness, with metacognition operationalized here as the participants’ knowledge and recognition of how they thought and worked. This study provides insight into how textbooks are written in practice and thus has implications for the research field of materials development; the findings also point to practical strategies that might be utilized by those who write language learning materials.

The present study investigated the effects of applying cumulative group dynamic assessment (G-DA) procedures (Poehner, 2009) to support EFL writing development in a university context in Iran. It focused on learner achievement, patterns of occurrence of mediation incidents, and learners’ and teachers’ perceptions towards G-DA. Quantitative data was collected from learners’ performance on writing tests and the frequency of occurrence of mediation incidents involving EFL writing components based on Jacobs, Zinkgraf, Wormouth, Hartfield, and Hughey’s (1981) scale. Findings revealed that G-DA was more effective than conventional explicit intervention for supporting EFL writing development. Also, it worked best for low ability learners as compared to mid and high ability ones. Besides, the number of mediation incidents declined from 27 in session one to 8 in the final session, confirming the efficacy of G-DA in promoting both EFL writing and learner self-regulation. Most teacher mediation involved language use, vocabulary, and organization and fewer incidents involved content and mechanics. Qualitative data analysis indicated that most learners and teachers held positive attitudes towards the efficacy of G-DA for supporting EFL writing development. However, a few participants asserted that the procedures were unsystematic, stressful, time consuming, and inappropriate for large classes.

This paper reports on an exploratory study that investigated the relationship between English as a foreign language (EFL) writers’ reported metacognitive strategy knowledge and their English writing performance in multimedia environments in a Chinese tertiary context. A self-report questionnaire was used to collect data on 126 participants’ metacognitive strategy knowledge and EFL writing scores. Mann-Whitney U Tests were conducted to explore differences between high (n = 65) and low (n = 61) EFL proficiency groups. Analysis of the data revealed that the participants’ metacognitive strategy knowledge was correlated significantly with their writing performance. The high EFL-proficiency group reported having statistically significantly more metacognitive knowledge about three clusters of metacognitive strategies (planning, monitoring, and evaluating) than their low EFL-proficiency counterpart. These important findings point to pedagogical implications that there is a need to integrate metacognitive strategies into teaching and researching EFL writing.

There is no shortage of research on learner preferences and teacher perceptions of the value of feedback in L2 writing. However, studies comparing opinions from both sides are rare. Moreover, little is known whether L2 proficiency impacts learner preferences for feedback. To bridge these gaps, this study surveyed 70 students and 16 teachers from an intensive English program in the U.S. on their preferences concerning six dimensions of L2 writing feedback: source, mode, tone, focus, scope, and explicitness. The findings suggest that (1) students overall regarded teachers as the most credible source of feedback and wanted teachers to mark all errors in their writing and correct them directly; (2) higher proficiency students showed more positive attitudes towards peer feedback and inclination towards written, comprehensive, and indirect correction; (3) students at the two ends of proficiency (high and low) favored feedback in a mixed tone; (4) while teachers and students were allies on the usefulness of oral feedback, feedback on both rhetorical and language issues, and feedback in a balanced tone, teachers were nonetheless neutral about the benefits of peer feedback and preferred focused, indirect feedback. Suggestions are offered for ESL writing instructors to adapt their feedback for its maximum effects.

While previous research on peer feedback in L2 writing has stressed the importance of training in giving useful comments on peer’s writing, very few studies have specifically explored metacognitive training in peer review interaction in terms of the perception and actual reviewing practices of L2 learners. This mixed-methods study employed a 12-week intervention course in L2 writing, in which eighteen Secondary One students, aged 12–13 years, received metacognitive training in peer review interaction. The training focused on metacognitive knowledge and metacognitive regulations. The results showed that, first, metacognitive training in peer review interaction helped change the perception of these young learners and increased their level of engagement and collaboration during the five peer review tasks. Second, metacognitive training appeared to encourage students to provide more content-related feedback than language-related feedback during dyadic interactions. Finally, it was found that the students were able to seriously consider their peer feedback when revising the peer-reviewed drafts, but written feedback had a much higher chance of being incorporated than did oral feedback. The pedagogical implications of these findings were discussed.

The purpose of this study was twofold: (a) to examine the level of authorial voice strength among Iranian second language (L2) writers; and (b) to investigate the relationship between L2 learners’ authorial voice strength and the quality of their argumentative written task performances. Argumentative writing samples were elicited from 129 upper-intermediate L2 learners in writing courses. To quantify learners’ voice strength, these samples were scored by two raters using an analytic voice rubric. Raters also provided a holistic rating of the overall authorial voice strength in written argumentations. The quality of argumentations was measured using the TOEFL scoring rubric. While descriptive results indicated that learners demonstrated a low level of voice strength in their argumentations, results from Multiple Regression Analysis (MRA) suggested positive associations between voice strength along with two of its dimensions and the quality of writings. Moreover, results from Multiple Correspondence Analysis (MCA) pointed to the association of low and mid-level of writing quality and low voice strength, and the prevalence of high and mid voice strength in learners with high proficiency in writing. Finally, while an Item Response Theory (IRT) analysis revealed that the ‘presence’ dimension of authorial voice was the most difficult one for L2 learners, a Differential Item Functioning (DIF) analysis showed that the difficulty of the three voice dimensions did not differ significantly across genders. The findings were discussed regarding English L2 writing within the Iranian context.

This preliminary study examines the rating behavior of five composition and five ESL writing teachers while evaluating a text from a university-level non-native (L2) English speaking student. Using an eye tracker, we measured raters’ dwell times and reading behaviors across four areas of interest—rhetoric, organization, vocabulary, and grammar. Results indicate that raters with differing disciplinary backgrounds read the text differently. L2 writing teachers tended to spend more time on and re-read the rhetorical, lexical, and grammatical features of the text while skipping over more of the grammar errors, while composition teachers read the text more deliberately. The findings suggest L2 writing teachers were more prone to skim and scan for information on which to base a grade while composition teachers delayed rating decisions until after reviewing the entire text, which is corroborated in previous research. These findings can expand our understanding of how disciplinary background can influence rating processes, which can inform rater training procedures, especially in disciplinary writing contexts where L2 writing is judged by individuals with and without expertise in composition or second language writing. Moreover, it demonstrates the utility of eye-tracking methods to examine the cognitive processes associated with reading and scoring student writing.

The present book was edited in honour of Liliana Tolchinsky, to pay tribute to her career as a researcher in the field of writing development. For this purpose, the editors of Written and Spoken Language Development Across the Lifespan have brought together researchers from all around the world who wished to share results from studies that reflect Liliana Tolchinsky’s influence on their work. The book starts with an introduction by the editors Perera, Aparici, Rosado and Salas, in which Liliana Tolchinsky’s career is described. In this introduction, the reader is embarked on a pleasant travel throughout Liliana Tolchinsky’s career, filled with ambitious and innovative projects, international collaborations and awards won. This book comprehends a total of 19 chapters, all aiming at investigating language development. It is divided into two parts: Part I gathers chapters focused on early literacy, while Part II focuses on later literacy development. This review is organised in two parts. The first part aims at presenting the book, by briefly describing each chapter and showing their specificities and similarities. This part will allow the reader to appreciate the book’s richness and diversity in terms of linguistic contexts, participants’ characteristics, levels of language investigated and methods of analysis used. In our second part, we discuss the book’s contents in relation to Liliana Tolchinsky’s career, by linking the chapters to her main interests and contributions to the field of language development.

Research on the texts of apprentice academic writers has found that they often exhibit weaknesses related to presenting an authoritative argumentative stance. This study rendered explicit linguistic resources for stance-taking and engaged advanced L2 writers in exploring stance expressions in published research. Both linguistic and language learning theories informed this study. Seven Mandarin-speaking learners of English from fields in social sciences engaged in three writing sessions in which they consulted a concordance tool organized and created to present genre moves (Swales 1990; 2004) and engagement strategies (Martin & White, 2005) used by academic authors in research introductions. Analysis of their drafts showed improvement in rhetorical move structure and stance deployment after using the tool. They were found to be more accurate in applying and identifying stances that present assertive claims and factual statements than moderately assertive stance expressions that present expansive meanings. Despite some success in learning, close text analysis reveals that more help is needed to support students in deploying appropriately assertive claims, substantiating strong claims, and managing their stance expression across several clauses. Overall, this study found that an explicit approach to learning about authorial stance has the potential to raise L2 writers’ consciousness and improve their writing.

Although handwriting is typically taught during early childhood and keyboarding may not be taught explicitly, both may be relevant to writing development in the later grades. Thus, Study 1 investigated automatic production of the ordered alphabet from memory for manuscript (unjoined), cursive (joined), and keyboard letter modes (alphabet 15 sec) and their relationships with each other and spelling and composing in typically developing writers in grades 4 to 7 (<i>N</i> = 113). Study 2 compared students with dysgraphia (impaired handwriting, <i>n</i>=27), dyslexia (impaired word spelling, <i>n</i>=40), or oral and written language learning disability (OWL LD) (impaired syntax composing, <i>n</i>=11) or controls without specific writing disabilities (<i>n</i>=10) in grades 4 to 9 (<i>N</i>=88) on the same alphabet 15 modes, manner of copying (best or fast), spelling, and sentence composing. In Study 1, sequential multilevel model regressions of predictor alphabet 15 letter production/selection modes on spelling and composition outcomes, measured annually from grade 4 to grade 7 (ages 9 to 13 years), showed that only the cursive mode <i>uniquely</i>, positively, and consistently predicted both spelling and composing in each grade. For composing, in grade 4 manuscript mode was positively predictive and in grades 5-7 keyboard selection was. In Study 2 all letter production modes correlated with each other and one's best and fast sentence copying, spelling, and timed sentence composing. The groups with specific writing disabilities differed from control group on alphabet 15 manuscript mode, copy fast, and timed sentence composing. The dysgraphia and dyslexia groups differed on copying sentences in one's best handwriting, with the dysgraphia group scoring lower. The educational and theoretical significance of the findings are discussed for multiple modes and manners of letter production/selection of the alphabet that support spelling and composing beyond the early grades in students with and without specific writing disabilities.

We examine the explanatory weight of child-related and contextual factors on first graders’ achievements in spelling and separation between words. The participants were 215 kindergartners, 113 boys and 102 girls (M = 5 years 4 months, SD = 4 months) from both monolingual and bilingual communities in Spain. They were native speakers of Spanish in the monolingual communities and bilingual Spanish/Catalan or Spanish/Basque speakers in the bilingual communities and had Catalan and Basque, respectively, as the language of instruction. The three languages have shallow orthographies. Children were first examined in kindergarten in a number of literacy related abilities (e.g., knowledge of letters, writing) to detect predictors of spelling and separation between words that were, in turn, evaluated at the end of first grade of elementary school. All the participants were assessed in their language of instruction. The best explanatory models were those including interactions among child-level factors and between these factors and contextual variables. Only knowledge of writing in kindergarten appeared as the common explanatory factor for first graders’ attainments. Attainments in spelling were predicted by children’s level of literacy and knowledge of letters moderated by parent’s education; performance in word separation was predicted by phonological awareness and vocabulary knowledge moderated by parental education. Teaching practices affected spelling performance but not learning to separate between words.

Given the widespread use of English for the international dissemination of scholars’ research results, numerous intercultural analyses have been undertaken in the field of English for Academic Purposes in diverse genres. Rhetorical and discursive conventions across languages and cultures have been studied to help non-native English scholars to be successful in the difficult endeavour of being granted publication in international English-medium publications. The increasing competition to get one’s research published in international journals in English has resulted in the authors’ need to clearly spell out what their contribution to their discipline is, a rhetorical convention which seems to be currently crucial especially in some fields. It is the aim of this paper to trace statements of contribution in the Introduction and Conclusion sections of research articles published in two international journals in finance and to compare the results with those obtained from an analysis of three manuscripts written in English by a team of Spanish scholars sent to the same journals but which received major revision or rejection reports. Reference to these statements made by reviewers in their reports will also be analysed to explore to what extent (non) compliance with this rhetorical convention may influence their final decision (not) to recommend publication.

The contribution of linguistic, reading, and transcription processes to writing in kindergarten English as a second language (ESL) children and their native-English speaking peers (EL1) were examined. ESL and EL1 performed similarly on one of the two measures of phonological awareness (PA) and on measures of early reading, spelling, and writing. EL1 outperformed ESL on a pseudoword repetition task and on the English vocabulary and syntactic knowledge tasks. ESL outperformed EL1 on a writing fluency measure. Correlation and hierarchical regression results varied as a function of the writing tasks (procedural or generative) and language status. Across language groups, writing tasks that captured children's developing graphophonemic knowledge were associated with a breadth of cognitive, linguistic, and early literacy skills. PA, reading, and transcription skills, but not oral vocabulary and syntactic knowledge contributed the most variance to writing irrespective of language status. The results suggest that parallel component skills and processes underlie ESL and EL1 children's early writing when formal literacy instruction begins in kindergarten even though ESL children are developing English oral and literacy proficiency simultaneously.

Adaptive help seeking and self-efficacy have been examined extensively over the last 20 years, but few studies have investigated their role in writing center tutoring, which has become an important component of process-oriented writing instruction. Using data collected over an 8-year period, this study analyzes the effect of writing self-efficacy (assessed using established self-efficacy scales) and help-seeking behavior (measured by frequency of writing center visitation) on writing performance as measured by composition grades. Participants were 671 undergraduates, approximately half of whom were international students for whom English was a second or third language. Data analyses showed an inverse correlation between self-efficacy and help-seeking behavior. In addition, high levels of help-seeking behavior resulted in better performance in composition classes, especially for the ESL participants; indeed, this behavior was the strongest predictor of success.

This article reports on the use of the British Academic Written English (BAWE) corpus as a source for developing test items for the Grammar and English Usage section of the Warwick English Language (WELT) test in 2007. A key feature of this newly designed multiple choice grammar test was its use of student-generated writing. The extracts used for the re-designed test were derived directly from the BAWE corpus, as opposed to text books, published sources or indeed, simulated extracts of academic writing devised by test developers, which had been the case previously. The rationale for using the BAWE corpus for language test design is outlined, with a particular focus on the attributes of the students’ writing within the corpus, and the inclusion of both first and second language writing. The challenges involved in developing grammar test items based on BAWE corpus data are also presented. While the procedures set out in the paper were undertaken within a specifically British higher education setting, it is hoped that the research will be of interest to test developers and/or researchers in writing skills in other academic settings worldwide.

The trend towards using English as an academic lingua franca has undoubtedly increased the awareness of a need for specific EAP writing instruction and inroads into researching student writing have been made. However, systematic improvements for a theory-informed teaching practice still require more detailed knowledge of the current state of student academic writing, which also takes into account local practices and requirements. Extended genre analysis provides such a means of researching student writing in specific settings. This is an innovative methodology which expands on English for Specific Purposes (ESP) genre analysis (cf. Bhatia, 1993, 2004; Swales, 1990, 2004) to systematically integrate corpus linguistic tools into the analysis and to take into account the special status of student genres. A special advantage of this methodology is that it can be applied easily and successfully to small-scale purpose-built corpora.This paper presents an application of extended genre analysis to a corpus of 55 student paper conclusions produced by non-native speakers in the initial phase of their studies. Findings suggest systematic differences in structure between student and expert genres, as well as a more complex set of differences in lexico-grammar, and especially the use of formulaic language, between research articles and non-native student papers. The implications of these findings as well as of the proposed methodology of corpus-based genre analysis for teaching practice are also discussed.

This article presents the results of a pilot study examining the use of first-person pronouns, certain adjectives and grading adverbs in a corpus of 51 French psychology student papers written in English as a second language. These results were compared to a corpus of published psychology articles and to a sub-corpus of psychology student texts from the British Academic Written English corpus (BAWE). Strategic use of pairs of evaluative words was found in the students' texts but not in the published texts. However, the variables of native language and level of field expertise cannot explain all of the variance observed. Future work will improve the validity of the findings by using larger corpora of student and published texts.

The aim of this study was primarily to investigate the effects of morphological strategies training on students with and without spelling difficulties in English as a foreign language (EFL), but also to assess the feasibility of morphological strategies training in a classroom context. The intervention was piloted in the sixth grade of a Greek primary school: 23 Greek-speaking students, aged 11-12, were assigned to the treatment group receiving explicit teaching on inflectional and derivational morphemic patterns of English words. The control group, composed of 25 Greek-speaking students of the same age, attending a different classroom of the same school, was taught English spelling in a conventional (visual-memory based) way. Both quantitative and qualitative methods were employed to gain insights: a pre- and post-test, an observation schedule, a student questionnaire and a teacher interview. The pre- and post-test results indicated that the metamorphological training yielded specific effects on targeted morpheme patterns. The same results were obtained from a sub-group of nine poor spellers in the treatment group, compared to a sub-group of six poor spellers in the control one. The observation data revealed that the metamorphological training promoted students' active participation and the questionnaire data indicated that students got satisfaction from their training. Finally, interview data highlighted that teachers considered the intervention as a feasible way of improving students' morphological processing skills in spelling.