Two Innovative Approaches for Teaching Writing

来源 :校园英语·下旬 | 被引量 : 0次 | 上传用户:lansekafei4271
下载到本地 , 更方便阅读
声明 : 本文档内容版权归属内容提供方 , 如果您对本文有版权争议 , 可与客服联系进行内容授权或下架
论文部分内容阅读
  【Abstract】It is, apparently, of paramount importance to have enough practice of English writing for a college student. Writing is so important that a number of linguists argue that no one can really master a second language if he or she ignores writing. Hence, many a principle of instructing English writing has been springing like mushrooms. This paper will discuss two of these knacks and methods of teaching writing to language learners which are the relation between product and process and the role of reading in teaching writing.
  【Key words】instructing English writing; product and process; the role of reading
  Introduction
  To master a second language, it is important to acquire proficiency in listening, speaking, reading and writing. In these “four proficiencies”, writing is the last but not the least important. We mention listening and speaking first only because at the initial stage of language acquisition, we have to use our ears and mouths more. Actually, it is very important to have enough practice of writing. Writing is so indispensable that some linguists believe that no one can really master a second language if he or she ignores writing. Since an increasing number of linguists emphasize on writing, there have emerged many principles of teaching writing, such as those based on the relation between product and process, the relationship between reading and writing, accounting for cultural backgrounds and providing as much authentic writing as possible.
  This paper will discuss two principles. Allying with some scholars’ theories, the first section is about balancing product and process. Receiving high approval among TESOL specialists, connecting reading and writing features the second portion. The third part will conduct a comparison between the two principles.
  Shifting from Product to Process
  In the past, students’ final essays were seen as finished products. Murray (1972) maintains that “most of us are trained as English teachers by studying a product: writing” (p. 3). Writing teachers merely taught and evaluated learners’ compositions by means of grades at that time. Up until the 1970s, the paradigm shifted from considering writing as a product to a process. Lindemann (2001) argues that “in the 1970s, researchers moved us from a preoccupation with the written product toward a responsible understanding of the process writers engage” (p. 32). Accordingly, there exists a transition on regarding writing as a product to a process. Based on the process theory, Zamel (1985) put forward a novel evaluation method of teaching students writing which was called process approach. She believes that “writing instructors should shift their traditional way of responding to students’ essays to meaning-oriented process approach” (p. 79) and to prove her position, Zamel conducted research in which she compared and analyzed some teachers’ actual behaviors of teaching writing in a public university. The survey operated smoothly and swimmingly and the outcome testified to Zamel’s perspective. Brown (2007) agrees with Zamel’s opinion, and he claims that “writing is a composing process and usually requires multiple drafts before an effective product is created” (p. 403). Consequently, regarding writing as a process and adopting process approach to teach writing receive dazzling endorsement among instructors.   After years of adapting writing as a process approach to language instruction, researchers were eager to witness evident benefits of implementing process approach into pedagogical practices. However, in some studies, the results seemed that students’ writing skills were not largely improved as expected. Leki (1992) states that “regardless of teachers’ comments, students’ writing did not improve in subsequent writing tasks” (p. 110). Therefore, researchers have been trying new ways to teach writing, and connecting reading and writing has come with the tide of fashion which will be demonstrated in detail in the next section.
  The Marriage between Reading and Writing
  Originally, many scholars mainly focused on the difference between reading and writing, and they think students employ their eyes to read an article yet write a paper with their hands. Nevertheless, as time glides on, an increasing number of linguists begin to emphasize on the positive affect of reading in the process of writing. Brown (2007) argues that “by reading and studying a variety of relevant types of text, students can gain important insights both about how they should write and about subject matter that become the topic of their writing” (p. 403). Tierney and Pearson seems to agree with Brown’s perspective, and hold that “reading is an act of composing parallel to writing” (p. 570). They believe that both the reading and the writing have five parallel stages: planning, drafting, aligning, revising and monitoring. In this case, both reading and writing are viewed as constructive process. Similarly, Frank (1978) also sees reading as an unavoidable ingredient in language writing and maintains that “reading provides a natural transition from speech to print” (p. 41). Agreeing with this proportion, Connor and Taylor (1982) studied oral and silent reading respectively, and declare that “written language is based upon oral language” (p. 441). Accordingly, reading does play an important role in writing, and language instructors should connect reading and writing in the process of teaching students writing.
  A Bridge between the Two Principles
  There are several common points between the two principles. The first aspect to note is that both of them are principles of teaching writing and can improve students’ writing skills. Furthermore, although the process approach is important to teach learners writing, the final writing product is more important. Brown (2007) argues that as in most language-teaching approaches, it is quite possible for you to go to an extreme in emphasizing process to the extent that the final product diminishes in importance. Try not to let this happen! The product is, after all, the ultimate goal; it is the reason that we go through the process of prewriting, drafting, revising, and editing. Without that final product firmly in view, we could quite simply drown ourselves in a sea of revisions. Process in not the end; it is the means to the end. (p. 393)   Similarly, in order to improve students’ writing, teachers should encourage students read many articles. However, although reading is important in improving students’ writing skills, writing is the ultimate goal. In other words, pushing learners’ writing skills up a notch is the main aim of encouraging them to read articles. Lastly, when it comes to process, Brown (2007) thinks process approach does many things, such as “giving students time to write and rewrite” (p. 392). Time is also an important factor according to Murray (1972) for the sake of giving students time to collect and contemplate their thoughts. He argues that “there must be time for the writing process to take place and time for it to end” (p. 6). Similarly, leaving students sufficient time to read before they write is also in need of consideration for language instructors. To put it differently, although learners can gain important insights through reading, they should be given enough time to read.
  Conclusion
  From the point of regarding writing as a product to writing as a process, instructors are more and more willing to accept process approach when they teach writing. Connecting reading and writing is another universally-acknowledged method to assist and support student writing development.
  This paper discusses the two principles respectively, and conducts a comparison by listing their common points. Sure, there are many other principles to teach writing, and a collection of new approaches will also emerge in the future. The ultimate goal is to help students improve writing skills.
  References:
  [1]Brown,H.D.(2007).Teaching by Principles:An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy.New York:Pearson Education.
  [2]Connor,U.,
其他文献
【摘要】科技时代的快速发展给教学带来了便利。随着新课改的全面实行,网络资源成为高校英语课外教学的主要来源,软硬件双方面的支持为高校培养了一批又一批的实用性人才。我国的英语教学模式比较传统,这就使行业人才极度稀缺。网络资源的应用能很好的改变这一现状,使学生英语课外教学得到更好的实践,适应当下网络教学的发展趋势。本文从网络资源对于高校英语的重要性这一点出发,结合我国目前的现状,论述高校英语中网络资源实
本文立足于重庆科技学院目前培养应用型人才的发展思路,结合工商管理学院学生的特点,提出基于技术技能人才培养的英语应用能力提升“3+2”模式,旨在改善目前我院学生英语能力
【摘要】全面有效的反馈能促进学生及时调整并采取有效的学习策略,有助于提高学生的学习效果,同时激发和维持学习动机。针对以往大学英语课堂反馈中所存在的诸多问题,构建了多维动态反馈机制,并将该机制应用于教学实践中,通过对实验组和控制组的对比分析来检验该机制的实际成效。应用结果表明,该反馈机制对大学英语课堂产生了积极的影响,能为学生提供全面及时的反馈,从而实现有效学习,提高英语综合应用能力。  【关键词】
在英语写作教学研究领域,自我效能感被认为是影响写作过程和写作教学的一个重要因素。自我效能感本文依据提升自我效能感的途径,深入探讨写长法的内在机制对自我效能感的影响
【摘要】在结合当前高效翻译教学的现状基础上,从多方面论述了高校翻译教学的局限性问题,并据此论述了多媒体化视角下高校翻译教学的全新内涵,最后提出了针对性较强的多媒体化视角下高校翻译教学的更新途径,希望能对于今后的高校翻译教学工作有一定的借鉴意义。  【关键词】多媒体教学 翻译教学 教学改革 教学途径  在高校翻译的教学课堂中,如何通过构建高效教学课堂,才切实提升学生的翻译能力和水平才是需要关注的问题
Focused on the issues which emerged in the traditional search engine that the result can not be satisfying in the precision or in the recall,based on the theory
【摘要】在当前的高校英语教育中,为培养学生的英语综合应用能力,是英语知识文化教育的前提。在当前的大学英语精读教学中,教师往往会忽略一些知识性的文化无内容,并且进行孤立的教学,外语教学的目的被认为是让学生合乎语法的使用句子和单词。这种理解是错误的,没有关注文化和语言之间的关系,而且忽视了文化差异对于学生的影响,本文对高校英语教育中的文化意识培养方法进行了探讨。  【关键词】高校英语 文化意识 方法 
本研究是在北方农牧交错带(武川)一个700m×900m的栗钙土区域内布80个调查样点,取得这些土壤剖面质地和CaCO3及其钙积层的数据等,对该区域栗钙土的CaCO3、粘粒、水分含量、容重
【摘要】近年来,信息技术的发展为外语教学衍生了一种新的教学模式-计算机辅助语言学习(CALL);丰富了外语教学模式。虽然客观因素在一定程度上能够影响外语学习者的学习效果,但是情感因素也会影响外语学习者的学习效果。因此,外语教学界十分关注情感因素在计算机辅助语言学习中的应用和影响。基于此本文旨在探讨在计算机辅助英语教学中应用克拉申“情感过滤假设”对英语学习者的学习效果是否存在积极影响。  【关键词】
【摘要】英语语法学习对大多数学生来说很枯燥,而翻转课堂能够促使学生从被动的知识接受者转变为积极的知识学习的参与者,教师从知识的传授者转变为知识学习的促进者,本文以主语从句为例,探讨翻转课堂在英语语法教学中的应用。  【关键词】翻转课堂 语法教学 主语从句  一、引言  英语中有很多不同类型的从句,比如,定语从句,主语从句,宾语从句,表语从句,同位语从句等,很多学生一提起从句就头疼,一提起语法就感觉