Short description

It is mainly through writing that knowledge is created and shared across boundaries of culture. A key objective is to improve our understanding of how written production is mastered and how this learning process can be made more effective for each and every European citizen, especially children at school and adults in the workplace. Given the diversity of educational systems and languages, it is important to build a common multidisciplinary research programme, sharing theoretical, methodological and educational resources. This research programme needs to focus on four complementary areas: “Early acquisition of writing skills”, “Improvements in written communication”, “Design of written documents” and “Technological advances in writing tools”. By bringing together European research teams that are already working on the topic of writing - or are intending to do so -, the COST Action will support the building of an active and open network sustained by regular scientific events, research meetings and junior researchers’ training. This research network will provide a means of disseminating recommendations throughout European society (schools, universities, workplace) in order to help professionals and citizens write, learn to write and teach writing more effectively within their particular cultural context, as well to communicate across cultural boundaries through writing.
Activity in this workgroup is therefore motivated by the following questions...
 What relationships between L1 and L2 inform the design of effective learning environments to foster effective L2 writing processes? What effect do various learner characteristics (L2 proficiency, vocabulary (L1, L2), reading skill, writing strategy preference) and task variables (task condition, writing medium, topic, use of sources) affect the writing process and the relation between process and text quality?
What relationships between the language specific definitions/concepts of genres (at the level of secondary and higher education) inform the design of effective environments to foster effective L2 writing processes? Analyses on various levels (theory, practice, text books, instruction, evaluation) in various L1’s (various languages), compared with ‘Global English’? What are distinctive and what are common features?

Keywords

Writing skills, mother tongue, ESOL, writing instruction, writing strategies, writing in the workplace, classroom teaching, professional writing

Leaders

Gert Rijlarsdam, Graduate School of Teaching and Learning, University of Amsterdam
Address: Spinozastraat 55, 1081 HJ Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Phone +31 20 5251288
E-Mail: G.C.W.Rijlaarsdam@uva.nl (Sub Workgroup 2.1)

Otto Kruse, Zurich University of Applied Sciences ZHAW (Sub Workgroup 2.2)

Address: Department of Applied Linguistics, Theaterstr. 17, Postfach, CH-8401 Winterthur, Switzerland
Phone: +41 58 934 6172
E-Mail: kreo@zhaw.ch

Aim

The overall aim of this workgroup is to support the improvement of written communication, both in education and in the workplace.
We aim to deliver course design parameters for effective L2 training situations (supported by L1-training situations), informed by analyses of the

1. relation of two major phenomena in L1 and L2 writing,
2. relation between writing processes in L1 and L2
3. relation between L1 specific concepts of genres and L2 concepts of genre
4. understanding the factors favouring the development of expertise in writing in L1 and L2.

Program 2.1 Improving writing in L1 and L2

The aim will be to identify the conditions for successful transfers between L1 and L2 writing strategies, provided learner and task characteristics, and to set up the course design parameters for effective L2 learning-to-write environments. It also aims at establishing a common set of course materials that can be used in various settings to L2-writing instruction.
Transfer between L1 and L2 writing strategies
Studies will be identified to analyse the relationship between L1 and L2 writing processes. Studies must have data on (1) processes (online writing behaviour measures via keystroke logging, probe reaction time, think aloud protocols, self-reports during writing), (ii) quality of resulting texts, (iii) learner characteristics and (iv) task characteristics. Studies may focus on L1 and/or L2. Studies may purely descriptive, explanatory (factors that explain certain processes) or interventional (the effects of a certain intervention programme are studied on writing processes and text quality). We will identify finished studies, current studies and research proposals. All relevant research materials will be collected
Deliverables

1. Inventory of studies (short descriptions, available via repository with free access, with studies and research materials)
2. Review L1 & L2 writing processes, Effects of L1-writing competency on L2-writing, and other exploratory factors for variation in L2-writing competency.
3. Data: Research materials: Texts and Rating systems, Processes (inputlog, writing process protocols), Interventions.
4. Data: Selection of writing processes (video and/or audio taped think aloud protocols, inputlog/scriptlog keylog data) for educational purposes (in repository). Selected are examples of key-processes like the use of sources, planning, goal setting, evaluation, revision.
5. Set up of trial study: re-use of writing processes in educational settings.

Analysis of effective interventions

All intervention studies identified will be analyzed (content: which strategies were trained; methodology: which learning activities were stimulated, in which order, etc.).
Deliverables

1. A selection of effective course materials for strategy training (available online in repository, free access).
2. Review paper identifying course design parameters

Set up of a trial: re-use of labour intensive course materials in interventions studies.

Study 1

In one or in two different L1-situations, a trial study will be set up where research materials from other studies are re-used in a different L1-context. A selection of the videotapes and think-aloud protocols (see 3.2.1., product 4) will be used to help students learn to write effectively in L2, through observing and comparing other writers at work. Students will be able to see and hear ‘models’ undertaking reading, planning, formulation and revision phases. Possibly these course writing processes will be embedded in a strategy focuses training (like CSRI, for instance (Torrance, Fidalgo & Garcia, 2007). The text that is studied will be an expository text, i.e. an important genre for research and business communication. Performances will be recorded (keystroke logging using, for example, Inputlog Scriptlog), and analyzed via a standard analysis protocol. If possible, the results of the intervention will be compared with those of students receiving traditional instruction.

Study 2

Other re-uses will be tested, using course materials identified in the analysis of effective interventions. These learning situations will be tested on the same principles, but with other participants and in other contexts, notably “peer learning” in workplace settings (occupational training, continuing education (Björk, Bräuer, Rienecker & Jörgensen, 2003).

Program 2.2 Comparative analysis of genres and genre teaching methods

The aim of this program will be to analyse the differences between prevailing academic genres in different European countries (e.g. variations in their function, structure, language, style, etc.) and consequent variations in teaching methods. For instance, précis writing is practised in every country (school and workplace). However the wide range of functions attributed to it and the diversity of linguistic and cultural contexts in which it is practised mean that the term “précis” actually has many different definitions. Our objectives will be as follows...

1. to define the different genres in different educational, social and cultural contexts, in order to achieve standard definitions and allow international comparisons (see, for comparison, PISA: Programme for International Student Assessment)

to characterize and map the tools used to teach these genres, and provide pointers to harmonising writing/ teaching practices throughout Europe, all the while respecting national diversity (Foster & Russell, 2003) to find out how learning and mastering a genre in L2 can feed back into written production in L1 (inter-language and intercultural permeability), and to generate a set of recommendations for the training of student writers, junior researchers, professional writers and translators at a European level.
to design comparative research approaches allowing the collection of reliable data on genres and genre teaching in associated with writing / teaching practices in different European states.

Scheme

1. Overview of the activities in relation to two sub-programs:
2.  

Workshop Barcelona
2009

Program for 2.2: Written Text Genres in Europe. Commonalities and Variation

Introduction

Presenting the subprogram; introduction of participants; finding an agreement on the agenda of the meeting.
Result: Group is ready for work.

Finding a working definition of genre

Differences in genre concepts in the national traditions are marked and have to be dealt with. Participants prepare a short statement on what in their opinion a genre is (dominant definitions in their L1-region) and on what traditions (2 – 3 references) this understanding of genre is based.
Result: We understand differences in genre theory and agree on a shared working definition.
Describing the main genres in secondary and higher education
Participants prepare a short list with descriptions of the most important genres used in their country in L1-teaching (based on text books analyses, handbooks etc.). They provide for each genre a short explanation. They don’t try to catch them all but see that they explain the important ones.
Result: We gained an overview of the dominant genres used in the main linguistic regions of Europe and create a base for a more complete genre inventory.

Comparative analyses of genre research

Participants prepare a summary of studies in their linguistic region to present in 10-15 minutes, highlighting the general approach and key results (Genre research in an intercultural context). It is less important to present all details; it is also relevant to show what kind expertise the participant represents.
Result: We understand the commonalities and variations between cultures.

Genre teaching in intercultural perspective, reports on writing in L2

What problems face students writing in L2 (which might be a particular foreign language, but also English as a common language in Europe), what kind of learning opportunity is writing in L2 providing and what kind of knowledge is needed to understand/ support these learning processes?
Result: We have a list of problems on writing in L2 and understand the core issues that we have to deal with.

Finding and Defining a meta-viewpoint for analysis

To make genre, genre teaching and the use of genres for learning purposes accessible for comparison, which dimensions of writing/ teaching/ writing practices/ writing-to-learn arrangements etc. have to be considered?
Result: We created a list of criteria for analyzing genres in intercultural perspective (point of departure: criteria used by Russell & Foster (2002, p. 39-44).

Strategies for comparative research

What quantitative and qualitative research is possible and needed? Can intercultural questionnaires for use in future studies (drafts for questionnaires will be provided) be useful? How can a collective mapping project about genres used in the major European countries/ cultures look like?
Result: We created ideas for future research.

Strategies for further research and collaboration within the COST action

The next steps of the COST action are not defined yet and future collaboration can be planned.
Result: We understand the next steps do be done and know who will participate in the future in what kind of a project.

Future Plans

2.2 The workgroup will have at least one additional meeting in 2009, either in connection with the summer school in August or as a separate event.