Evaluating the Role of Writing in the First and Second Year University Foreign Language Curriculum

Abstract

Approaches to foreign language (FL) instruction have changed a great deal in the past fifty years, the most fundamental change being the shift from a focus solely on language form to a focus on communicative competence (CC). Although most FL instructors now appear to focus on CC in the teaching of speaking, they do not necessarily apply CC to writing in the same way. The study reported here attempts to describe the role currently played by writing in the first and second-year FL curriculum by detailing the methods used by 10 professors working at 7 different universities across the United States to teach FL writing in these courses. Results indicate that writing-to-learn activities make up a large majority of the writing methods used, but that learning-to-write activities that foster CC in writing have also been successfully integrated into the beginning FL curriculum.

Redefining writing in the foreign language curriculum: Toward a design approach

“…A follow-up study by Hubert and Bonzo (in press) combined analysis of surveys, class observations, interviews, and instructional materials to explore L2 writing using the theoretical knowledge and teaching practices of 10 instructors of French, German, and Spanish from six universities. Although the two studies' participants were different (personal communication, April 26, 2018), the authors' findings closely aligned with Hubert (2014): Low levels of instructor knowledge of L2 writing theory were observed, and theoretical knowledge only peripherally informed instructional practices. As Hubert and Bonzo (in press) explained, direct writing instruction (i.e., prewriting, editing for content, and consideration of audience and genre) was lacking among nearly all courses observed.…”

“…Also shared across these studies is the finding that students and instructors in lower‐level courses place less value on presentational writing than those in advanced courses. This is problematic given that attrition rates are high among lower‐level learners, and, when their courses deemphasize writing, this “greatly reduces the possibility that these learners will ever be taught the writing conventions of the FL … they will have missed out on a great deal of important information regarding the creation of effective [FL] texts” (Hubert, , p. 85). Should those learners continue FL study at more advanced levels, it is likely they will encounter a challenging situation given that instructors may assume that learners can read literature as well as texts on a variety of cultural and content‐related topics, discuss these materials in class, and write cogent and coherent analyses (Steinhart, ).…”

“…However, in recent years, numerous scholars have critiqued the lack of focus on FL writing in the second language acquisition research base and in U.S. FL curricula (e.g., Belcher, ; Bernhardt, Molitoris, Romeo, Lin, & Valderrama, ; Byrnes et al, ; Hubert, ; Lefkowitz, ; O'Donnell, ; Reichelt, Lefkowtiz, Rinnert, & Schultz, ; Ruiz‐Funes, ; Schultz, ; Scott, ; Vyatkina, ). Among them, Schultz wrote:

Within the context of globalization, which should make the contributions of foreign language education so compelling … it seems to me ironic and disheartening that the teaching of writing within foreign language departments in the United States should still lag in terms of incorporating into the curriculum the growing body of L2 research … just as globalization reconfigures the teaching of literature and other disciplines, so, too, must the teaching of foreign language writing be reconfigured.

…”

“…However, in recent years, numerous scholars have critiqued the lack of focus on FL writing in the second language acquisition research base and in U.S. FL curricula (e.g., Belcher, 2012;Bernhardt, Molitoris, Romeo, Lin, & Valderrama, 2015;Byrnes et al, 2010;Hubert, 2014;Lefkowitz, 2011;O'Donnell, 2007;Reichelt, Lefkowtiz, Rinnert, & Schultz, 2012;Ruiz-Funes, 2011;Schultz, 2011;Scott, 1996;Vyatkina, 2011). Among them, Schultz wrote:…”

Student and faculty perceptions of writing in a foreign language studies major

“…This result could also explain why students expressed language‐related issues (e.g., the subjunctive, agreement, and lexical variety) with greater specificity than content‐related issues, suggesting that faculty may not explicitly state what is required to effectively and appropriately communicate within the discipline. Previous work has similarly pointed to instructor preoccupation with grammar (Hubert, ; Lefkowitz, ; O’Donnell, ), potentially interfering with “those additional aspects [of writing] that are so crucial to the development of good writing skills” (Hubert, , p. 85).…”