2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.asw.2013.01.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

How different are they? A comparison of Generation 1.5 and international L2 learners’ writing ability

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
9
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Doolan and Miller (2012) investigated the developmental writing from a Central California community college and found significantly more verb errors, prepositional phrase errors, word form errors, and total identified errors in Generation 1.5 writing compared with L1 writing. In studies of entrance exams at a northeastern university where the participants had already been preselected for L2 training based on survey information, di Gennaro (2009, 2013) compared international L2 (IL2) and Generation 1.5 student writing using a many-facet Rasch analysis. Findings from di Gennaro (2009) suggest comparable grammatical (accuracy) scores between the two groups, while findings from di Gennaro (2013) indicate that grammatical (accuracy) control was a greater strength in IL2 writing than in Generation 1.5 writing.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Doolan and Miller (2012) investigated the developmental writing from a Central California community college and found significantly more verb errors, prepositional phrase errors, word form errors, and total identified errors in Generation 1.5 writing compared with L1 writing. In studies of entrance exams at a northeastern university where the participants had already been preselected for L2 training based on survey information, di Gennaro (2009, 2013) compared international L2 (IL2) and Generation 1.5 student writing using a many-facet Rasch analysis. Findings from di Gennaro (2009) suggest comparable grammatical (accuracy) scores between the two groups, while findings from di Gennaro (2013) indicate that grammatical (accuracy) control was a greater strength in IL2 writing than in Generation 1.5 writing.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The first stage of the study builds upon a previous study (di Gennaro, 2013), which included 134 participants, equally divided among international and resident groups. All were undergraduate students at a private university in a northeastern US city and all had indicated on writing placement surveys that English was not their first language.…”
Section: Participantsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…di Gennaro, 2012;Harklau, Losey, & Siegal, 1999;Reid, 2006;Roberge, Siegal, & Harklau, 2009). Initial claims, based primarily on anecdotal accounts, have been followed by empirical studies, some supporting and others disputing original assertions of differences across the two groups of learners in terms of their writing ability (di Gennaro, 2009(di Gennaro, , 2013Doolan, 2013Doolan, , 2014Doolan & Miller, 2012;Levi, 2004). While such discussions may seem esoteric outside the L2 writing community, findings from this body of research have direct implications for how students' writing is assessed for placement into college writing programs and, in turn, affect the type of support and services students are offered during their college careers.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…The Finally those individuals who immigrated to a new country between the ages 6 and 12 were labelled the "1.5 generation" (Rumbaut, 1991;Rumbaut, 2004). This "decimal" system was used in assessing differences in immigrants' adaptive outcomes, mainly in language capability (e.g., di Gennaro, 2013;Doolan, 2013;Oropesa & Landale, 1997). The relevant findings and discussions are displayed in the next section.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%