State of the Field Entry

Vases in Downtown Charlottesville, VA. All serve one common purpose--to help things inside them grow!!

There have been many theories in ESL writing pedagogy. Many of them cannot be used alone. Not every approach is suitable for all classroom settings. After reading my colleague’s writing I saw a different variety of ideas that can be applied. My classmates have reviewed articles in different areas: collaborative learning, monolingualism, assessment, language transfer, and genre, feedback, second language acquisition, instruction, teaching materials, and English varieties all over the world.

In the realm of education teaching writing is seen as the most challenging task. In this particular area giving students instruction in writing compositions imposes a challenge which appears in one form after another. Although many scholars and researchers have explored and experienced ways to improve curricula and instruction in composition class, ESL writing is not limited only to composition writing.  

When it comes to writing (here it means writing anything) the first problem writers is if my writing grammatical. They do not think about content and the form of the message they intent to convey. When correction is too much, students are found to be dumb and less confident to venture. Then researchers try to find ways to give better feedback to students. When giving feedback is not satisfactorily working, teachers introduced collaborative learning. Students assess their peers’ work in the classrooms. Some go far enough as in not correcting their grammar at all. Yet many scholars remain on the side of giving corrective feedback to students in order to satisfy them as students expect to have their work fixed by their instructors. Peer correction saves time for both students and teachers. Students feel more engaged in the process. Of course their grammar is corrected whether they can recall why they make certain mistakes or not; they gladly stand corrected. Lee (2003) also suggests that unnecessary feedback may distract both the teacher and the students from reaching the goal of the lesson. It is important for the teacher to be aware of disadvantage of correction that would hinder students’ progress. Ferris (2003) also argues that instead of ignoring errors made by students, the teacher should find a suitable form of feedback. That idea actually sprouted out after Truscott (1996) argument that error corrections must be eliminated as they are an obstacle for the students.

The process teaching is a promising idea, but students’ work should and must be assessed. Assessment is necessary for their performance. Although ESL learning here is regarded as a process in which students learn from their errors and keep refining their works throughout the course, there is a point where their ability to write is judged. TOEFL and GRE test their ability to write impromptu essays and arguments. There is also a need to give feedback for students that are trying to take such tests.

Many students should realize that ability to write with clarity and facility does not come to them overnight. That is the reason why they have to believe in process learning although the test results are the outcome.

Yet there is another problem at the discourse level. They have to understand how ideas and thought are put to work. They need to understand the nature of relationship between the sender and receiver of a message. There are some things that they can say but they should not. A memo in an office should be like an office memo, a lengthy business report should be for an executive in a company. A story should be for readers who wish to enjoy reading it. Awareness of genre is therefore important for the learners to be aware of. Then it is the duty of instructors to help their students aware of such differences. Hyland (2003) argues that genre models are scaffolding of the social contexts of writing and the role of rhetoric.

After they have done their writing, students have tons of issues to work on. They expect to have their final grades. They are all that matter. Once the grades are given they tend to forget whatever they have done in their class. Therefore a new idea is introduced, product versus process. Therefore students are assigned or encouraged to come up with portfolios where they their progress can be seen and assessed by both the instructors and by themselves. Then they consider the different ways English is used in the different parts around the world. The discourse patterns differ from society to society. The North American version of English and the English that is used in the inner circle also have distinct features. Then there are Englishes around the world. Therefore it is important for the ESL instructor to be aware of the differences. That a message is sent in a different form does not mean there is no transmission of that message. Song (2011) therefore suggests training in cultural diversity for teachers. Another point is suggested by Song (2011) is the difference between the ESL and EFL contexts. EFL students do not immerse in the local community. Immigrant bilinguals have different goals.  In her article “Early Study Abroad English” students from abroad come to one of the countries in the inner circle, their English is neither native nor non-native English, which she calls World English.

Leki (1995) points out that students do not seem to apply what they have learnt in their ESL writing classes and they tend to imitate what their teachers suggest in the feedback. In the observation the writer notices that students have some forms of resistance to the teachers’ demand. When asked by the teacher not to write about their own cultures a student says “I am Chinese.” Yet what her professor wants is not realized. Therefore it is the ESL teacher’s responsibility to help the student accommodate herself by using different approaches.

That clearly reflects that, despite the fact that teachers should be aware of the cultural background, students are supposed to do their assignments right, and it is the ESL teachers that are responsible for them to show them the way.

With all of these areas explored there is no single approach for EFL/ESL writing teachers to steadfastly hold on to. All approaches may be useful at a point. Truscott may state that grammar correction is not at all useful. Others may try to prove him wrong. The point here is not to argue over subtle similarities and differences among theories. Teachers are practitioners; they deal with their students physically and mentally. It is all their duty to fulfill their students’ wishes. Truscott’s idea of treating students as clients inspires me. Of course they are some sheepish creatures that we can train or blame. The outcome is either a reward or an ordeal depending on how instructors translate the seen and heard theories into practice. They may inspire their own ideas for their students. Individuals are unique. Even if there are standardized test to diagnose students’ ability or proficiency to put them in a particular class, individual students may have different needs and different background cultures. Their uniqueness is, like a kaleidoscopic picture, never the same. It is the teachers who have to see to the need in the classroom and exploit the theories that he has learned from books.