Writers on the Move: Visualizing Composing Processes Involved in Academic Writing

Subject Areas : All areas of language and translation

Alireza Ameri ¹ , Zahra Pourniksefat ²

1 - English Language Studies, South Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University
2 - Faculty of Foreign Languages and Literature, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran, Iran

Received: 2017-04-10 Accepted : 2017-12-24 Published : 2017-12-01

Keywords: Think-aloud Protocol, Editing, Academic text Genres, Inputlog, Revision,

Abstract :

The present research study aimed to explore covert processes of editing and revision which were involved in writing four different academic text genres (i.e. abstract, conclusion, data commentary, and cover letter) in English language. To this end, six EFL learners with Persian as their mother were recruited to participate in this study. All the participants attended an induction session and each individual participant was invited to attend four writing sessions (total of 26 sessions for all 6 participants). Think-aloud protocol was employed for participants to verbalize all their thought processes, including stray notions, false starts, and incomplete or fragmentary thoughts, while performing the composition tasks. All the writing sessions were video-recorded and the participants were asked to insert their texts in Microsoft Word, which was in fact linked to the keystroke logging program, that is, Inputlog. The composition tasks were then dropped into Inputlog software to trim (i.e. reconstruct text production). The collected data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis as an interpretation and analysis method based on a three-step procedure proposed by Strauss and Corbin in grounded theory (open coding, axial coding, and selective coding). The results offered four main processes of planning, formulating, evaluating, and reformulating. The reformulating process was further subdivided into editing and revision. To draw a more accurate comparison between the processes, the researchers needed to resort to a statistical apparatus and run the Test of Chi Square. The results of chi-square indicated that there were significant but weak differences between the processes of editing and revision among different text genres. The results of the study would contribute to an understanding of how writing, editing and revising processes could integrate the learners into the process of academic writing.

References:

Alamargot, D., & Chanquoy, L. (2001). Through the models of writing. New York: Springer

Allal, L., & Chanquoy, L. (2004). Revision revisited. In A. Allal, L. Chanquoy, & P. Largy (Eds.), Revision cognitive and instructional processes (pp. 1-7). New York: Springer.

Arndt, V. (1987). Six writers in search of texts: A protocol-based study of L1 and L2 writing. ELT Journal, 41(4), 257-267.

Bruffee, K. A. (1984). Collaborative learning and the "conversation of mankind". College English, 46(7), 635-652.

Flower L. & Hayes J. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College composition and communication, 32(4), 365-387.

Hayes, J. R. (2004). What triggers revision? In L. Allal, L. Chanquy, & P. Largy (Eds.), Revision cognitive and instructional process (pp. 9-20). New York: Springer.

Hyland, K. (2003). Genre-based pedagogies: A social response to process. Journal of second language writing, 12, 17-29. doi:10.1016/S1060-3743(02)00124-8

Hyland, K. (2006). English for academic purposes: An advanced resource book. London: Routledge.

LeFevre, K. B. (1987). Invention as a social act.   Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books/about/Invention_as_a_Social_Act.html?id=4UO2zL-S8RMC

Matsuda P.L. & Silva T. (2010). Writing. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), An introduction to applied linguistics (pp. 232-246). UK: Hodder Education    

McCarthey, S. J. (2007). Four metaphors of the composing process. In L. Bresler (Ed.), International handbook of research in art education (pp. 477-496). The Netherlands: Springer.

Palys, T. (2008). Purposive sampling. In L. M. Given (Ed.), The sage encyclopedia of qualitative research methods (Vol. 1&2, pp. 697-698). USA: Sage Publications.

Pym, A. (2005). Explaining Explicitation. In K. Klaudy, K.Karoly, & A. Foris (Eds.), New Trends in Translation Studies: In honor of Kinga Klaudy (pp. 17-28). Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.

Seow, A. (2002). The writing process and process writing. In J. C. Richard & W. A. Renandya (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice UK: Cambridge University Press.