R. M. Manch ón, L.Murphy, & J. Roca de Larios Universidad de Murcia

1. Teaching and researching L2 writing: Exploring academic identities as teachers and researchers in a Spanish university setting. R. M. Manchón, L.Murphy, & J. Roca de Larios Universidad de Murcia

2. University research assessment system • Research track system • Individual res. output assessed every six years • Institutional research assessment (quality assessment) • Research groups • Head researcher (IP) & researchers • University based. • Research output: publications & publicly financed research projects (“convocatorias competitivas”). • Research projects • National level (“I+D+I”) • Regional level • Other: banks, university,etc.

3. The research programme • The dynamics of the L2 learner’s writing beliefs and strategies. • Relationship between writing beliefs and writing strategy implementation • 4th year group • Any changes in the students´ beliefs system and in their L2 composing strategy deployment after completing an EAP course?

4. Planning and implementation of the research • Methodological/Ethical decisions taken to keep the teacher’s/researchers’ roles separate • Findings: • Outsider perspective: writing as situated practice • Influence of insights for our pedagogical-decision making.

5. The research: Rationale • Dynamic character of a person´s belief system (Schommer, 1994a, 1994b; Hofer and Pintrich, 2002). • Educational experiences impact beliefs and strategy use (Mori, 1999a, b; Sakui and Gaies, 1999; Gan, 2004; Chamot, 2005). • Post-process movement in writing research (cf. Atkinson, 2003): shaping of beliefs and the implementation of strategic behaviour as a function of participating in a given “culture of practice” (Elbaum, Berg and Dodd, 1993).

6. The study: Research questions • Is there any significant difference in the writing beliefs about L2 writing held by Spanish university students after a period of instruction aimed at helping them to become more able L2 writers? • Is there any significant difference in the self-reported L2 writing strategies used by Spanish university students after a period of instruction aimed at helping them to become more able L2 writers?

7. Participants: The students.

8. Participants: The teacher • 25 years experience of EFL teaching • Native speaker of English • 4 years of experience in teaching the EAP course • Professional training and expertise: • A degree in French • An MA in Applied Linguistics • Lecturing on SLA and L2 teaching methodology • 10 years of involvement in research projects on L2 writing.

9. Method: The EAP course • Main aim: help students develop more advanced and integrated academic reading and writing skills. • Contact hours: 3 hrs. x 30 weeks. • Scaffolding: • Making students aware of the different dimensions of the process of text construction • Modelling and practising the use of different writing strategies • Analytic reading of academic texts • Receiving and providing feedback

10. The EAP Course: texts • Journals (fluency) • Assignments (3 drafts & peer response) • Personal statement for a postgraduate course in UK • A report of a survey carried out by them on a topic of their choice • A synthesis of several texts on the topic of education or gender • EXAM: an argumentative essay

11. Method: Chronology of the research and data sources

12. I believe that I … 1 Strongly agree 2 Agree 3 Un-decided 4 Disagree 5 Strongly disagree 3. have the ability to successfully complete the writing assignments I have been asked/will be asked to submit in the different units I am doing this year. 1 2 3 4 5 4. will never reach native-like standards in my English writing. 1 2 3 4 5 5. will never be able to write in English as easily as I can write in my native language 1 2 3 4 5 6. have enough knowledge of English to do my writing assignments successfully this year. 1 2 3 4 5 7. have learnt enough in past courses to help me to do my writing assignments successfully this year. 1 2 3 4 5 8. must put a lot of effort and work in if I want to do my writing assignments successfully his year. 1 2 3 4 5 Example items: Beliefs Questionnaire

13. 11. writing in English is practically the same as writing in my native language 12. writing in English is a question of producing a text that is as grammatically correct as possible 13. being able to express oneself successfully in writing in English is hard and it takes a long time 14. writing in English will help me develop my confidence as a user of English 15. writing well in English is a question of having a lot of ideas 16. writing in English helps to discover how the English language works 17. writing in English is a way of practising what I know Example items: Beliefs Questionnaire

14. 21. I should rewrite my text several times before handing it in. 22. I should make a plan before I start writing 23. I must avoid making use of my native language when writing in English 24. I must pay a lot of attention to language matters (vocabulary, grammar, etc) when expressing myself in English. 25. students must accept responsibility for their own progress in writing. 26. looking at model texts written by native speakers is a good way of learning how to write in English Example items: Beliefs Questionnaire

15. BEFORE I START WRITING AN ESSAY IN ENGLISH … Never true 1 Usually not true 2 Some what true 3 Usually true 4 Always true 5 1. I consider the instructions/question and try to understand the requirements. 1 2 3 4 5 2. I start writing without having a written or mental plan. 1 2 3 4 5 3. I think about what I want to write and make a plan in my mind, not on paper. 1 2 3 4 5 4. I think about what I want to write and write a detailed plan in English. 1 2 3 4 5 5. I think about what I want to write and write a detailed plan in Spanish. 1 2 3 4 5 6. I just note down words and short notes related to the topic (in English). 1 2 3 4 5 8. I look at a model written by a native speaker or more proficient writer. 1 2 3 4 5 10. I consider who is going to read my text and take decisions accordingly. 1 2 3 4 5 Examples: Strategies Questionnaire

16. Questionnaires: Retrospective 4. Do you feel more/less confident now about writing in English than you did at the beginning of our course? Please explain if any changes have taken place and why. 9. Would you say that your beliefs about what writing in a foreign language entails have changed after completing this course? If so, please try to specify what changes have taken place. 8. Imagine that somebody asked you “What have you learned in this course?”. What would you answer? 10. Would you say that doing this course has influenced the manner in which you approach and complete writing tasks? If so, what changes, do you think, have taken place? Please specify.

17. Method: the questionnaires • Cost-benefit considerations • General requirements: length, instructions to respondents & nature and wording of questionnaire items(Bryman, 2001; Dörnyei, 2003; Oppenheim, 1992; Peterson, 2000).

18. Methodology: Keeping separate the roles of teacher and researchers • Design of the questionnaires: teacher only looks at the final text • Administration: teacher participates • Data analysis: teacher only involved in mechanical parts (introducing data in computer programmes) • Teacher asked to write retrospective narrative • Teacher gets involved in the data analysis once retrospective narrative is completed and students answer final retrospective questionnaire

19. Insider’s view Method non-invasive (always uncomfortable having work “evaluated” in some way) Unsure what was being looked at so couldn’t fit work to research Just got on with course as usual Interviewed by an old student. Comfortable Asked to write narrative. Just wrote about what seemed important to my course

20. Results: Outsider perspective. Writing as situated practice

21. Results: Changes in beliefs • Self-efficacy beliefs • Beliefs about the nature of writing • Beliefs about the teacher

22. Results: Changes in beliefs Self-efficacy beliefs The student writers finished their literacy experience with increased confidence in their ability to write complex academic texts: Item 1: “I will learn to write complex academic texts this year” M: Time 1=4/Time 2= 4.33; SD: T1=.534/T2= .617; p≤0.05.

23. Results: Changes in beliefs Beliefs about the nature of writing • Assumptions: writing entails posing oneself problems at different levels of sophistication, including ideational, textual and audience concerns. • The EAP exerted a statistically significant influence in reinforcing the students´ perception of the problem-solving nature of composing (T1: M: 3.2; SD: 1.082; T2: M: 3.73; SD: 1.032; p<0.02). • “Writing in English means finding ways to solve a great variety of problems” (66.7% agreement or strong agreement at Time 1 and 86.7 % at Time 2)

24. Results: Changes in beliefs Retrospective questionnaire: • Writing is more complex than it may seem at first sight (B9) • Writing in English is a problem-solving task (G15). • I thought that writing was easier than it is actually (D10) • Writing in English is a task which can take much time (3) • Writing in English is not easy as I believed it was (C15)

25. Results: Changes in beliefs Beliefs about their teachers • Perceptions of the teacher´s response to their writing(“My teachers pay more attention to how I write than to what I write”; M: T1=3.46/T2=2.8; SD: T1=1.060/ T2=1.082; p ≤ 0.03). But the way this course is designed now, I have all these different pieces of work about different things that interest different people. I find it quite fascinating. It’s quite interesting for me, as a teacher, to be reading this work and responding to it, not only as a writing teacher but also as an interested reader.

26. Results: Changes in beliefs Beliefs about their teachers • “Correction” (Time 1) > “Feedback” (Time 2 ) • Teacher: somebody mainly helping them with their texts(text-type conventions; structuring of ideas. Time 1) > Teacher´s role as also including help with the actual process of composing (Time 2)

27. Results: Changes in strategies • Working cooperatively with others (M: T1=2.4/T2=2.9; SD: T1=1.05/1.22; p ≤ 0.01) • Use of models (T1:13% agreement with relevant item; T2: 53.4%) • Revision: • Distance from the text & purposeful revision: Monitoring and evaluation metacognitive strategies • More expert-like approach to revision: sentence structure & audience concerns.

28. Results: Changes in strategies. Changes in declarative knowledge and procedural knowledge about strategies • I can apply techniques and strategies that I didn’t know before (F4) • Now many writing strategies have been given to me (I4) • We have learnt different writing techniques (I8) • I have learnt to work and how approach the writing, several techniques and organization (H8) • This course has helped me to open my eyes and realise that writing has its tricks (D10) • Now I’m more organised when I have to start writing (B10)

29. Results: Changes in strategies. Planning strategies a. Produce and organise ideas more clearly and efficiently b. Look at topics from different angles c. Constructing an argument: arguments and counter-arguments d. Audience taken into account when planning • Idea generating techniques (M8) • Now I am able to develop and find more ideas for a particular topic (I10) • Now I tend to do brainstorming before approaching a task more frequently than before doing this course (A10) • Now I know how to plan in writing (F4). • (I have learned) to organise my ideas before writing (N8) • Helped me to know how to organise my ideas better when putting them on paper (L10)

30. Changes in strategies. The retrospective questionnaire Formulation strategies • Improving the style and structure of texts • Coping better with language problems that arise • Developing arguments better • I now know a lot of new techniques to improve my style and the structure of my texts (M4) • We have learnt to cope with some language problems that usually take place (I8) • I have learnt to use various sources, use the information and combine it with my opinions into well-presented writing (H8)

31. Results: The Insider perspective • Insights • Confidence; confirmation of positive view of course • Fascination < different viewpoint • Questions thrown up • E.g. Use of models • Surprises • Use of mother tongue > more Res Qs • Rereading every sentence > more Res Qs • Interpretations • Rich array of knowledge to draw on

32. Conclusion: Outsider perspective • Impact that educational experiences can have in shaping beliefs and modifying strategic behaviour. • The implementation of successful and context-sensitive pedagogical practices surely depends on the presence of certain conditions in the educational setting: • Importance of teacher´s own training • Programme: duration and inclusion of a metacognitive component

33. Conclusion If writing teachers are expected to devise and implement enabling and sensitive pedagogical practices, they need help and training in the first place: discussions of teacher preparation to teach writing in FOREIGN language contexts are absent(Exceptions: Leki, 2001; Casanave, Forthcoming)

34. Conclusion Sakui and Gaies (1999): a study of learner beliefs “can lead to more effective instructional planning and implementation” (p. 487). Question for further research: how the empirical data collected in this and similar studies can lead to more enabling teaching practices in instructed language contexts in which teachers must help students to improve their capacity to express themselves in writing in their second language.

35. Conclusion: The insider´s perspective Research feeds into teaching Teaching feeds into research Importance of team: trust, joint knowledge. Separate insider/outsider roles. Different viewpoint: helps to link to other research, see where it fits in broader picture. Complexity of teaching, human interaction. Reality of teaching “messy”; outside view of research “clean”

36. THANK YOU GRACIAS