Writing: The Process of Discovering Meaning

Abstract

Until quite recently research on composition and the classroom practices that it influenced focused on the written products that students composed. Reseachers and writing teachers, realizing that this focus on product did not take into account the act of writing itself, therefore began to investigate the process of composing. This research has both identified the complex nature of the composing process and raised questions about past approaches to the teaching of writing. A study of the composing processes of proficient ESL writers corroborates the findings of this research and likewise challenges ESL writing pedagogy. Since writers do not seem to know beforehand what it is they will say, writing is a process through which meaning is created. This suggests composition instruction that recognizes the importance of generating, formulating, and refining one's ideas. It implies that revision should become the main component of this instruction, that writing teachers should intervene throughout the process, and that students should learn to view their writing as someone else's reading. Methods that emphasize form and correctness ignore how ideas get explored through writing and fail to teach students that writing is essentially a process of discovery.

Contrastive rhetoric in context: A dynamic model of L2 writing

“…Another important assumption underlying the static theory is that text is merely a linguistic code. Despite the increasing recognition of the negotiation and construction of meaning that take place both in the process of writing (e.g., Zamel, 1982) and in the process of reading (e.g., Tiemey & Pearson, 1985), the textual structure is still construed as the direct representation of the writer's mental process, which is to be decoded by the reader. For this reason, some early contrastive rhetoric researchers assumed that the examination of text alone can reveal the "thought patterns" of the writer (Kaplan, 1966, p. 4) or the "rhetorical patterns" of the Ll written discourse (Hinds, 1983, p. 186).…”

Effectiveness of Teacher and Peer Feedback : Through the Lens of Korean Tertiary Writing Classroom

“…More specifically, not only students' writing ability (Zamel, 1982), but also cultural and institutional policies as well as teachers' beliefs and values toward writing (Lee, 2008a) can influence how their feedback is formed. Therefore, the present study attempts to examine whether teacher and peer feedback can be effectively conducted as a regular class routine, especially in an EFL tertiary level writing classroom which contains most of the constraints mentioned earlier.…”

The effects of blog-mediated peer feedback on learners’ motivation, collaboration, and course satisfaction in a second language writing course

“…Peer feedback is one of the components of social constructive learning (Vygotsky, 1962(Vygotsky, , 1978 of writing, which manifests itself in collaboratively providing and responding to peers' written comments or feedback. It offers L2 learners an opportunity to use target language in a meaningful way (Krashen, 1982), foster audience awareness (Zamel, 1982), develop writer confidence (Leki, 1990), and engage in negotiation of meaning and interaction (De Guerrero & Villamil, 2000;Mendonca & Johnson, 1994). Therefore through peer feedback students learn from each other and grow together in the journey of their L2 learning.…”