Second‐language writing in university‐level basic language programs: A survey of student and instructor beliefs
The majority of US university students studying foreign languages are enrolled in introductory courses that are typically part of a coordinated curriculum. Such courses conventionally include the assessment of second language (L2) writing skills. However, given that these assessments can be broadly...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Foreign language annals 2022-06, Vol.55 (2), p.383-407 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 407 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 383 |
container_title | Foreign language annals |
container_volume | 55 |
creator | Issa, Bernard I. Koronkiewicz, Bryan Faretta‐Stutenberg, Mandy |
description | The majority of US university students studying foreign languages are enrolled in introductory courses that are typically part of a coordinated curriculum. Such courses conventionally include the assessment of second language (L2) writing skills. However, given that these assessments can be broadly conceived and vary by program, their design and implementation are subject to differing opinions and beliefs from the stakeholders involved. In an effort to better understand how their views of L2 writing assessments overlap and/or diverge, the present study examined instructor (N = 28) and student (N = 183) beliefs in Spanish language programs at three public US universities using an online Likert‐scale and ranked‐choice questionnaire. Results revealed that although there was misalignment regarding the pedagogical purpose of such assignments, in general there was broad agreement among the two groups, including the use of a writing‐to‐learn approach to develop both specific and broad linguistic skills.
The Challenge
Assessment of second language writing is a ubiquitous foreign‐language classroom practice. But what specifically is being assessed? And why? And how? Knowing where instructors and students overlap (or not) with regard to their beliefs about these questions is essential to addressing stakeholder perspectives in basic language program curriculum development. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/flan.12609 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2682862505</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1340253</ericid><sourcerecordid>2682862505</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2829-a5606f4e9130ed4e9a80a0566639fd346196f8d5e2bd8c9e9e07715e9f53d4483</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kL1OwzAUhS0EEqWwsCNZYkNKsZ3Ysdkq1PKjCgZAYovc5LpylSbFTlpl4xF4Rp4El6CO3OUM57vnXh2EzikZ0TDXptTViDJB1AEaUJUkkUoZOUQDQiiPUirfj9GJ90tCiGIpHSD_AnldFd-fX2Fz0eoF4K2zja0W2Fa4rewGnLdNtwNgAyWea29zvIfXrl44vfI3eIx96zbQ4dpg37QFVA3WVRFifOPavKkdnkNpwfhTdGR06eHsT4fobTp5vb2PZs93D7fjWZQzyVSkuSDCJKBoTKAIqiXRhAshYmWKOBFUCSMLDmxeyFyBApKmlIMyPC6SRMZDdNnnhic_WvBNtqxbV4WTGROSScE44YG66qnc1d47MNna2ZV2XUZJtis125Wa_ZYa4IseBmfzPTh5pHFCGI-DT3t_a0vo_knKprPxU5_5A3DWhoE</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2682862505</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Second‐language writing in university‐level basic language programs: A survey of student and instructor beliefs</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Journals</source><source>Education Source (EBSCOhost)</source><creator>Issa, Bernard I. ; Koronkiewicz, Bryan ; Faretta‐Stutenberg, Mandy</creator><creatorcontrib>Issa, Bernard I. ; Koronkiewicz, Bryan ; Faretta‐Stutenberg, Mandy</creatorcontrib><description>The majority of US university students studying foreign languages are enrolled in introductory courses that are typically part of a coordinated curriculum. Such courses conventionally include the assessment of second language (L2) writing skills. However, given that these assessments can be broadly conceived and vary by program, their design and implementation are subject to differing opinions and beliefs from the stakeholders involved. In an effort to better understand how their views of L2 writing assessments overlap and/or diverge, the present study examined instructor (N = 28) and student (N = 183) beliefs in Spanish language programs at three public US universities using an online Likert‐scale and ranked‐choice questionnaire. Results revealed that although there was misalignment regarding the pedagogical purpose of such assignments, in general there was broad agreement among the two groups, including the use of a writing‐to‐learn approach to develop both specific and broad linguistic skills.
The Challenge
Assessment of second language writing is a ubiquitous foreign‐language classroom practice. But what specifically is being assessed? And why? And how? Knowing where instructors and students overlap (or not) with regard to their beliefs about these questions is essential to addressing stakeholder perspectives in basic language program curriculum development.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0015-718X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1944-9720</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/flan.12609</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Alexandria: Wiley</publisher><subject>Attitudes ; Beliefs ; beliefs and philosophy ; Classrooms ; College Faculty ; College Second Language Programs ; College Students ; Curricula ; Curriculum Design ; Design ; Foreign language learning ; Grammar ; Higher education ; Language acquisition ; Pedagogy ; postsecondary/higher education ; Principles ; Questionnaires ; Second Language Learning ; Second language writing ; Second language writing instruction ; Spanish ; Spanish as a second language instruction ; Student Attitudes ; Student Motivation ; Student writing ; Teacher Attitudes ; Teacher education ; Teaching ; Teaching Methods ; Writing Evaluation ; writing proficiency assessment (WPT) ; Writing Skills</subject><ispartof>Foreign language annals, 2022-06, Vol.55 (2), p.383-407</ispartof><rights>2022 American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages</rights><rights>Copyright American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages Summer 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2829-a5606f4e9130ed4e9a80a0566639fd346196f8d5e2bd8c9e9e07715e9f53d4483</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-5557-4472 ; 0000-0002-4366-1808</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fflan.12609$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fflan.12609$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1340253$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Issa, Bernard I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Koronkiewicz, Bryan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Faretta‐Stutenberg, Mandy</creatorcontrib><title>Second‐language writing in university‐level basic language programs: A survey of student and instructor beliefs</title><title>Foreign language annals</title><description>The majority of US university students studying foreign languages are enrolled in introductory courses that are typically part of a coordinated curriculum. Such courses conventionally include the assessment of second language (L2) writing skills. However, given that these assessments can be broadly conceived and vary by program, their design and implementation are subject to differing opinions and beliefs from the stakeholders involved. In an effort to better understand how their views of L2 writing assessments overlap and/or diverge, the present study examined instructor (N = 28) and student (N = 183) beliefs in Spanish language programs at three public US universities using an online Likert‐scale and ranked‐choice questionnaire. Results revealed that although there was misalignment regarding the pedagogical purpose of such assignments, in general there was broad agreement among the two groups, including the use of a writing‐to‐learn approach to develop both specific and broad linguistic skills.
The Challenge
Assessment of second language writing is a ubiquitous foreign‐language classroom practice. But what specifically is being assessed? And why? And how? Knowing where instructors and students overlap (or not) with regard to their beliefs about these questions is essential to addressing stakeholder perspectives in basic language program curriculum development.</description><subject>Attitudes</subject><subject>Beliefs</subject><subject>beliefs and philosophy</subject><subject>Classrooms</subject><subject>College Faculty</subject><subject>College Second Language Programs</subject><subject>College Students</subject><subject>Curricula</subject><subject>Curriculum Design</subject><subject>Design</subject><subject>Foreign language learning</subject><subject>Grammar</subject><subject>Higher education</subject><subject>Language acquisition</subject><subject>Pedagogy</subject><subject>postsecondary/higher education</subject><subject>Principles</subject><subject>Questionnaires</subject><subject>Second Language Learning</subject><subject>Second language writing</subject><subject>Second language writing instruction</subject><subject>Spanish</subject><subject>Spanish as a second language instruction</subject><subject>Student Attitudes</subject><subject>Student Motivation</subject><subject>Student writing</subject><subject>Teacher Attitudes</subject><subject>Teacher education</subject><subject>Teaching</subject><subject>Teaching Methods</subject><subject>Writing Evaluation</subject><subject>writing proficiency assessment (WPT)</subject><subject>Writing Skills</subject><issn>0015-718X</issn><issn>1944-9720</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kL1OwzAUhS0EEqWwsCNZYkNKsZ3Ysdkq1PKjCgZAYovc5LpylSbFTlpl4xF4Rp4El6CO3OUM57vnXh2EzikZ0TDXptTViDJB1AEaUJUkkUoZOUQDQiiPUirfj9GJ90tCiGIpHSD_AnldFd-fX2Fz0eoF4K2zja0W2Fa4rewGnLdNtwNgAyWea29zvIfXrl44vfI3eIx96zbQ4dpg37QFVA3WVRFifOPavKkdnkNpwfhTdGR06eHsT4fobTp5vb2PZs93D7fjWZQzyVSkuSDCJKBoTKAIqiXRhAshYmWKOBFUCSMLDmxeyFyBApKmlIMyPC6SRMZDdNnnhic_WvBNtqxbV4WTGROSScE44YG66qnc1d47MNna2ZV2XUZJtis125Wa_ZYa4IseBmfzPTh5pHFCGI-DT3t_a0vo_knKprPxU5_5A3DWhoE</recordid><startdate>20220601</startdate><enddate>20220601</enddate><creator>Issa, Bernard I.</creator><creator>Koronkiewicz, Bryan</creator><creator>Faretta‐Stutenberg, Mandy</creator><general>Wiley</general><general>American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4T-</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>7T9</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AIMQZ</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>CPGLG</scope><scope>CRLPW</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>LIQON</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5557-4472</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4366-1808</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20220601</creationdate><title>Second‐language writing in university‐level basic language programs: A survey of student and instructor beliefs</title><author>Issa, Bernard I. ; Koronkiewicz, Bryan ; Faretta‐Stutenberg, Mandy</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2829-a5606f4e9130ed4e9a80a0566639fd346196f8d5e2bd8c9e9e07715e9f53d4483</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Attitudes</topic><topic>Beliefs</topic><topic>beliefs and philosophy</topic><topic>Classrooms</topic><topic>College Faculty</topic><topic>College Second Language Programs</topic><topic>College Students</topic><topic>Curricula</topic><topic>Curriculum Design</topic><topic>Design</topic><topic>Foreign language learning</topic><topic>Grammar</topic><topic>Higher education</topic><topic>Language acquisition</topic><topic>Pedagogy</topic><topic>postsecondary/higher education</topic><topic>Principles</topic><topic>Questionnaires</topic><topic>Second Language Learning</topic><topic>Second language writing</topic><topic>Second language writing instruction</topic><topic>Spanish</topic><topic>Spanish as a second language instruction</topic><topic>Student Attitudes</topic><topic>Student Motivation</topic><topic>Student writing</topic><topic>Teacher Attitudes</topic><topic>Teacher education</topic><topic>Teaching</topic><topic>Teaching Methods</topic><topic>Writing Evaluation</topic><topic>writing proficiency assessment (WPT)</topic><topic>Writing Skills</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Issa, Bernard I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Koronkiewicz, Bryan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Faretta‐Stutenberg, Mandy</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection【Remote access available】</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Docstoc</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>Linguistics Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Linguistics Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>One Literature (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Education Database (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest research library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Foreign language annals</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Issa, Bernard I.</au><au>Koronkiewicz, Bryan</au><au>Faretta‐Stutenberg, Mandy</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1340253</ericid><atitle>Second‐language writing in university‐level basic language programs: A survey of student and instructor beliefs</atitle><jtitle>Foreign language annals</jtitle><date>2022-06-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>55</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>383</spage><epage>407</epage><pages>383-407</pages><issn>0015-718X</issn><eissn>1944-9720</eissn><abstract>The majority of US university students studying foreign languages are enrolled in introductory courses that are typically part of a coordinated curriculum. Such courses conventionally include the assessment of second language (L2) writing skills. However, given that these assessments can be broadly conceived and vary by program, their design and implementation are subject to differing opinions and beliefs from the stakeholders involved. In an effort to better understand how their views of L2 writing assessments overlap and/or diverge, the present study examined instructor (N = 28) and student (N = 183) beliefs in Spanish language programs at three public US universities using an online Likert‐scale and ranked‐choice questionnaire. Results revealed that although there was misalignment regarding the pedagogical purpose of such assignments, in general there was broad agreement among the two groups, including the use of a writing‐to‐learn approach to develop both specific and broad linguistic skills.
The Challenge
Assessment of second language writing is a ubiquitous foreign‐language classroom practice. But what specifically is being assessed? And why? And how? Knowing where instructors and students overlap (or not) with regard to their beliefs about these questions is essential to addressing stakeholder perspectives in basic language program curriculum development.</abstract><cop>Alexandria</cop><pub>Wiley</pub><doi>10.1111/flan.12609</doi><tpages>25</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5557-4472</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4366-1808</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0015-718X |
ispartof | Foreign language annals, 2022-06, Vol.55 (2), p.383-407 |
issn | 0015-718X 1944-9720 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2682862505 |
source | Wiley-Blackwell Journals; Education Source (EBSCOhost) |
subjects | Attitudes Beliefs beliefs and philosophy Classrooms College Faculty College Second Language Programs College Students Curricula Curriculum Design Design Foreign language learning Grammar Higher education Language acquisition Pedagogy postsecondary/higher education Principles Questionnaires Second Language Learning Second language writing Second language writing instruction Spanish Spanish as a second language instruction Student Attitudes Student Motivation Student writing Teacher Attitudes Teacher education Teaching Teaching Methods Writing Evaluation writing proficiency assessment (WPT) Writing Skills |
title | Second‐language writing in university‐level basic language programs: A survey of student and instructor beliefs |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-29T09%3A46%3A51IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Second%E2%80%90language%20writing%20in%20university%E2%80%90level%20basic%20language%20programs:%20A%20survey%20of%20student%20and%20instructor%20beliefs&rft.jtitle=Foreign%20language%20annals&rft.au=Issa,%20Bernard%20I.&rft.date=2022-06-01&rft.volume=55&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=383&rft.epage=407&rft.pages=383-407&rft.issn=0015-718X&rft.eissn=1944-9720&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/flan.12609&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2682862505%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2682862505&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ1340253&rfr_iscdi=true |