Articulating struggle: ESL students’ perceived obstacles to success in a community college writing class

Finn, Heather B.

doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2018.09.001

Cited by 10 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…My review of the 75 articles published in JSLW reveals that 48 of them (64%) draw on theory, such as genre theory/systemic functional linguistics (Wette, 2017b;Worden, 2019;Yasuda, 2011), sociocultural theory (Liao, 2018), specifically activity theory (Cho, 2017;Fujioka, 2014), perezhivanie (Mochizuki, 2019), ecological perspectives (Zhu, 2020), intercultural rhetoric (Abasi, 2012;Liu & Du, 2018), feminist theory (Sánchez-Martín & Seloni, 2019), attribution theory (Finn, 2018), complexity theory (Yu et al, 2020), language socialization (Friedman, 2019), critical perspectives (Britton & Leonard, 2020;Liu, 2008), and Bakhtin's dialogism (Merkel, 2020). In studies that do not make explicit reference to theory, the investigations usually start with a practical issue in the classroom, such as the role of technology in teacher feedback (Ene & Upton, 2018) and how students perceive corpus use in the writing classroom (Yoon & Hirvela, 2004).…”

Section: Key Theories and Methodologies Adoptedmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two studies have addressed the challenges younger L2 students face in acquiring academic literacy, namely, adolescent English learners (Spycher, 2007) and community college students (Finn, 2018) in the US. To help students succeed in academic writing, teachers can provide explicit instruction that addresses particular features of academic language (e.g., authoritative stance, conjunction, and reference) (Spycher, 2007), as well as opportunities for students to reflect on and articulate their struggles (Finn, 2018).…”

Section: Development Of Academic Writing/literacy (N = 20)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Student collaboration can be exploited at different stages of the writing process; for instance, prewriting collaboration through face-to-face discussion or online text chat (Liao, 2018;Neumann & McDonough, 2015), collaborative writing (during writing) (Storch, 2005;Yang, 2014), and group writing conferences (after writing) (Mochizuki, 2019). Further, teachers can pay greater attention to issues of student voice (Thurlow et al, 2019), identities, agency (Liu, 2008;Liu & Tannacito, 2013), as well as the obstacles students may face in their academic literacy development (Finn, 2018;Spycher, 2007) so that they can better design writing instruction to empower students and cater to their needs.…”

Section: Students and Student Learning Of Writingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Developments in classroom-based research on L2 writing

Lee

2022

10.14746/ssllt

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reviews and reflects on developments in classroom-based research on second or foreign language (L2) writing from 2001 to 2020, based on scholarship drawn from the Journal of Second Language Writing, the flagship journal of the field. The review covers a total of 75 classroom-based studies and examines the major research themes and key findings under three research strands: (1) students and student learning of writing; (2) teachers and teaching of writing; and (3) classroom assessment and feedback, as well as the key theories and research methodologies adopted in extant classroom-based studies on L2 writing. The article ends with a discussion of the practical implications arising from the review, as well as potential research gaps that inform future directions for L2 writing classroom-based research. By providing a state-of-the-art review of developments in classroom-based research on L2 writing, this article contributes to a nuanced understanding of salient issues about learning, teaching and assessment of writing that take place in naturalistic classroom contexts, with relevant implications for both L2 writing practitioners and researchers.

show abstract

Section: Key Theories and Methodologies Adoptedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Development Of Academic Writing/literacy (N = 20)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Students and Student Learning Of Writingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Developments in classroom-based research on L2 writing

Lee

2022

10.14746/ssllt

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It has been suggested that a substantial part of the struggle that ESL students experience in math courses is due to their limited mathematical vocabulary (Krick-Morales, 2017). Research has shown that ESL students tend to perform well in classes that are not based on writing (Finn, 2018). ESL students who have an average skillset in mathematics tend to do well in numberbased problems due to their understanding of the mathematical symbols that are shared worldwide (Krick-Morales, 2017).…”

Section: Struggling Esl Students With Math Word Problemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing the Performance of ESL and English-Native Speaking Students in an Introductory Level Statistics Course

Aljobaily

Brown²,

Whitehead³

et al. 2020

IJE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

English as a second language (ESL) students often face more challenges than their English-Native Speaking (ENS) peers due to language and cultural barriers. The purpose of this study is to investigate the difference in performance between ESL students and ENS students in the introductory level statistics course, STAT150, at the University of Norther Colorado (UNC). Due to the dichotomous nature of the data and the large differences in sample sizes between ESN and ESL students, the Bootstrapped Logistic Regression model is used to analyze the data. Contrary to the findings of previously conducted studies, the results of this study suggest that ESL students who have been enrolled in STAT 150 at UNC are just as likely to receive a high mark in the course as their ENS counterparts. One explanation for this finding is that the level of instruction and quality of content provided throughout the course gave all students, including ESL students, all the information necessary to succeed in the course. If this explanation is accepted, the outcomecentric results found by this study reflect well upon the overall quality of instruction and English proficiency policies at UNC.

show abstract

“…In the context of the U.S. college community, a qualitative study was conducted by Heather B. Finn (2018) to analyze the reason for four students' failures in writing class. All four EFL/ESL learners have lived several years in the U.S.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring Senior High Schoolers’ Inhibiting Factors in English Writing Activities

Sasmita

Tyas²

2022

ijoeel

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This explanatory sequential mixed method study aims to determine the students’ attitudes toward the main inhibiting factor of English writing activity and skill development supported by the teacher’s perception. Beyond writing being one of the most complex languages and communication skills to be mastered, the success or failure of students in writing could also be influenced by various factors. This study discusses five factors: affective factor, writing apprehension, linguistic factor, writer’s block, and tactical factor. The eleventh-grade students and a senior English teacher of one public school in Malang became the participants in the study. This study has two types of data: qualitative and quantitative. The quantitative data are collected first, then qualitative data to support explaining or elaborate on the quantitative result. This research uses two instruments: 1) a closed-ended questionnaire to obtain quantitative data on learners’ perceptions, and 2) a semi-structured interview to draw the teacher’s perspective. The qualitative data analysis was conducted using statistical analysis and supported by statistical software, SPSS. A descriptive analysis was applied to analyze and describe the qualitative data. The main inhibiting factor in English writing activity faced by the eleventh graders of Senior High school 1 Malang was the writer’s block factor related to students’ motivational block at the beginning or during the writing process and their difficulties in developing and connecting different ideas.

show abstract

Articulating struggle: ESL students’ perceived obstacles to success in a community college writing class

Cited by 10 publications

References 10 publications

Developments in classroom-based research on L2 writing

Developments in classroom-based research on L2 writing

Comparing the Performance of ESL and English-Native Speaking Students in an Introductory Level Statistics Course

Exploring Senior High Schoolers’ Inhibiting Factors in English Writing Activities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About