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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Foreign language annals 2022-06, Vol.55 (2), p.383-407
Hauptverfasser: Issa, Bernard I., Koronkiewicz, Bryan, Faretta‐Stutenberg, Mandy
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