Language Reflection Fostered by Individual L2 Writing Tasks

Abstract

There has been a growing interest in the study of writing from the perspective of its potential contribution to language development. However, scant attention has been paid to key methodological considerations regarding the analysis of the connection between L2 writing processes, reflection on language while writing, and language learning. In an attempt to advance in this domain, and informed by models of L2 writing, and cognitive L2 writing research framed in the problem-solving paradigm, this study provides a comprehensive description of the language reflection individual writers engage in when solving the linguistic problems they face while completing writing tasks in their L2. The think-aloud protocols generated by 21 EFL learners while writing an individual argumentative essay were analyzed on the basis of a reconceptualization of language-related episodes as problem-solving strategy clusters. The result is a comprehensive, theoretically motivated, and empirically based coding system that is offered as a basis for future research in the domain. We discuss the methodological implications of our analytic approach and advance some theoretical implications for future debates on the language learning potential of individual writing tasks.

Methodological Advances in Investigating L2 Writing Processes

“…Finally, this study, along with the article by López-Serrano et al (2019), demonstrates the value of verbal protocols in elucidating the content of writers' thoughts about even the relatively fine-grained processes involved in the formulation (or translation) process. Although such data have to be treated with caution because of the risk that they reflect post-hoc rationalizations, when combined with complementary information from more objective measures, they provide a valuable insight into the goals that drive the writing process at different text locations.…”

“…Although there are general issues with TAP methods arising from reactivity and the theory-laden nature of self-reports, the article by López-Serrano et al demonstrates that, in fact, TAP methods can provide a window into some of the writer's concerns as they grope their way to formulating a proposition in words. Consider the example given by López-Serrano et al of a language-related episode (LRE) ( Table 2, López-Serrano et al, 2019). This shows a writer's protocol, expressed in their L2 (English in this case) as they formulated the final clause of a sentence, "as I have been an eager learner since my early childhood" (our italics).…”

“…Having sketched some of the broader theoretical context within which these studies have been carried out, we turn now to discussing the individual articles. To do so, we have divided them up into three groups: those that use think-aloud protocols (TAP), and hence provide information about the content of writer’s thoughts during writing (López-Serrano, Roca de Larios, & Manchón, 2019); those that use either keystroke logging and/or eye movements, and hence provide moment-by-moment information about the distribution of different types of processes (Barkaoui, 2019; Chukarev-Hudilainen et al, 2019; Leijten, Van Waes, Schrijver, Bernolet, & Vangehuchten, 2019); and those that combine keystroke logging with eye-tracking and retrospective verbal protocols, and hence provide information about the distribution of different types of processes and (retrospectively) about the content of the writer’s thoughts (Révész, Michel, & Lee, 2019).…”

“…As all the contributors have stated, the aim is to identify the cognitive processes underlying writing. The ultimate aim is to employ observations and experimental manipulations of these processes to build theories that can be used to help writers write more effectively in their second language and, as López-Serrano, Roca de Larios, and Manchón (2019) argue, to facilitate learning of the second language.…”

The relationship of proficiency to speed fluency, pausing, and eye-gaze behaviours in L2 writing

“…According to Hulstijn (2011), the construct of L2 proficiency is made up of linguistic cognition (i. e., phonetic-phonological, morphonological, morphosyntactic, and lexical knowledge and the speed at which these components can be applied by learners) and metacognitive competences. Given that lower proficiency is associated with less automatized linguistic skills (Lindgren et al, 2008;Schoonen et al, 2009) and less developed strategic orientation of problem-solving behaviours (López-Serrano et al, 2019;Manchón et al, 2009;Roca de Larios et al, 2008), less proficient L2 writers will struggle more with handling the competing demands imposed on planning, translation, and monitoring by working memory constraints. Therefore, assuming that equal pressure is exerted on planning activities due to conceptualisation demands, lower proficiency writers will probably display decreased speed fluency and greater frequency and length of pausing.…”