Facilitating L2 Writers' Interpretation of Source Texts

Abstract

Student success in higher education often involves the effective integration of source texts into students' writing (Horowitz, 1986); therefore, advanced second language (L2) students are particularly well served by effective reading-to-write instruction. Teaching L2 students to write from sources is challenging because of several issues, including limited practice with reading-to-write tasks and limited knowledge about the organizational structure (at many levels) of the texts they are reading and those they are expected to write (Ferris, 2009;Grabe & Zhang, 2013). In this pedagogical article the researchers present key reading-to-write instructional interventions that have been refined over eight semesters of university-level L2 writing instruction. The interventions promote reading-to-write development by moving from comprehension of source materials to a focus on students' capacities to interpret (i.e., summarize and paraphrase) source texts (Spivey, 1990). To provide an overview of the interventions, the authors first describe the curricular sequencing. Next, three lessons targeting specific focal skills are presented to provide instructors with readily adaptable activities and materials. Finally, general tips for successful summary and paraphrasing instruction are discussed. Appendices include samples of assignments and student work.This pedagogical article presents curricular interventionsrefined over eight semesters of instruction-developed for a university first-year composition (FYC) course for international English learners. The interventions promote reading-to-write development by focusing on students' capacities to interpret (i.e., summarize and paraphrase) source texts. We conceptualize 716

Mapping Master’s Students’ Use of External Sources in Source-Based Writing in L1 and L2

“…Teachers should focus on the importance of deliberate fragmentation of the writing process, be it from a planning, pausing, revising, or source-use perspective. Doolan and Fitzsimmons-Doolan (2016) propose a sequential way to instruct source-based writing, as they argue that a shortcoming of much summary instruction is that it is exclusively centered on the summary as the end goal. They propose to include the techniques of summarizing and paraphrasing into larger written assignments, such as essays, for which the combination of independent and integrated writing is necessary.…”

“…After all, writers must compare information from different sources, contrast this information and then organize it into a logical text, by relating the information to their own knowledge and ideas (Martínez et al, 2015;Mateos et al, 2014;Segev-Miller, 2004). Doolan and Fitzsimmons-Doolan (2016) mention several variables influencing this process, such as basic reading competence and vocabulary knowledge but also knowledge of genre-dependent text structure and other discursive features necessary for a correct understanding and interpretation of the reading materials. Indeed, source texts may contain complementary or contradictory information, which makes the interpretation of multiple sources a complex task.…”

Envisioning multilingualism in source-based writing in L1, L2, and L3: The relation between source use and text quality

“…Writing instructors should help students to realize the importance of deliberate fragmentation of the cognitive writing process, starting from planning, reading, writing, and revising the written texts. According to Doolan and Fitzsimmons-Doolan (2016), a sequential approach of teaching synthesis writing may have a more beneficial impact on writing performance of students than summary instruction, which exclusively focused on the summary as the ultimate goal. They propose to incorporate summarizing and paraphrasing techniques into larger written assignments, such as essays, in which the interplay between independent and integrated writing is important, since paraphrasing and summarizing strategies are often practiced in isolated writing contexts.…”

“…Due to the cognitively demanding nature of a readingto-write task, it is not surprising that synthesis writing is challenging for L1 writers who write in their own native language (Vandermeulen et al, 2020). Writing from multiple sources in a second or foreign language even places a heavier burden on the cognitive loads and adds another layer to the linguistic and cognitive complexities, as lexical, grammatical, and idiomatic resources tend to be less developed in a second or foreign language (Hinkel, 2003;Doolan and Fitzsimmons-Doolan, 2016). While L1 writers can easily translate their thoughts into writing in a rhetorical manner due to fewer linguistic barriers, L2 writers may experience greater difficulties in retrieving lexical items, adjusting to style, grammar, and spelling, and adapting writing content to satisfy standards of second language writing, especially in academic writing (Grabe and Zhang, 2013).…”

Source-Based Writing in Professional Spanish as a Foreign Language: Some Pedagogical Insights Based on a Quali-Quantitative Approach

“…Consequently, good linguistic and cognitive skills are necessary to be able to select the most relevant information from multiple sources, integrate it ethically, and produce a coherent text suitable for the intended audience (Leijten et al, 2017(Leijten et al, , 2019. Source-based writing in a second and foreign language 2 increases cognitive complexity: the writer's lexical and grammatical knowledge is less developed in that language (Doolan and Fitzsimmons, 2016;Hinkel, 2003), which influences not only the reading and understanding of sources, but also the writing of the text.…”