Scholars have at various points discussed the needs of second language (L2) writers enrolled in "mainstream" composition courses where they are mixed with native (L1) English speakers. Other researchers have investigated the experiences of L2 writers in mainstream classes and the perceptions of their instructors about their abilities and needs. Little research, however, has directly compared L1 and L2 students (mostly Generation 1.5) taking composition classes together. For this article, the researchers collected writing samples from 56 L1 and 74 L2 students enrolled in a university (mainstream) first-year composition course. Using a mixed-methods design, they analyzed the texts for language error counts as well as measures of lexical and syntactic complexity; they juxtaposed these with insights from survey responses of both groups of writers and in-depth interviews. They conclude that, although L1 and L2 students have much in common, the L2 students had observed and (self-)perceived language needs that were significantly different from those of the L1 students. These included differences in linguistic accuracy, lexical diversity, and language-related anxiety. Implications for pedagogy include recommendations for teaching L2 writers to self-edit for common patterns of errors and sensitize students to the value of nuanced and purposeful lexical variety in their writing. S ince the 1980s, scholars of second language (L2) writing have debated whether the differences between first language (L1) writers and L2 writers are substantial enough to separate these learners into different courses and/or teach them differently in mixed or sheltered classes-for example, the TESOL Quarterly Forum discussion between

No abstract

No abstract

Although most writing centres maintain policies against providing grammar correction during writing tutorials, it is undeniable that students expect some level of grammar intervention there. Just how much students expect and receive is a matter of speculation. This article examines the grammar-correction issue by reporting on a survey of L1, L2, and Generation 1.5 (Gen 1.5) writing-centre attendees. Results reveal that while all groups expected grammar help, L2 students expected the most. In addition, L1 and Gen 1.5 writers reported receiving more grammar help than they expected. These findings suggest that tutors may not distinguish the language needs of L1 writers from those of Gen 1.5 and L2 writers; meanwhile, they may generally provide more grammar support to all tutees than writing-centre training and ideology recommend. The findings of this study may help writing centres craft more nuanced grammar policies and provide critical tutor training to better match students’ needs and expectations.

No abstract