“4ing”

“4ing”

Motivatingwriting

teaching

K. Buyse (K.U.Leuven & Lessius Hogeschool)

K. Buyse, “4ing”, TBLT-conference, Leuven, sept. 2005 ([email protected]) 2

1-2-3-4

“1 ing”

“2 ing”

“3 ing”

“4 ing”


“1 ing”: Teaching 2000+


“2 ing”: Teaching writing (i)


“2ing”: Teaching writing (ii)


“2ing”: Teaching writing (iii)


“2 ing”: Teaching writing (iv)


“2 ing”: Teaching writing (v)

Default teaching FL writing at a micro level (student-teacher): in a traditionally one-to-one communication

using traditional tools = manually underlined and/or annotated text no systematic annotation discouraging (the “Red Sea”) low return: time-consuming, inefficient


“2 ing”: Teaching writing (vi)

normative error marking (not aiming at the assimilation of typical Spanish structures)

purely skill oriented training – at the expense of more cognitive and metacognitive aspects –

Default teaching FL writing at a meso- and macro- level (career, institution / BaMa): not embedded in a research environment


“2 ing”: Teaching writing (vii)

nor in a overall view on language acquisition and learning

no well-founded insight in + and - characteristics output writing per career level / institution

no well-founded phasing in objectives and points of interest per career level / institution

no well-founded insight in final attainment level per career


“3 ing”: Motivating writing teaching (i)

digital experimental corpus of writing tasks at different stages of language careers

experimental digital handling of writing tasks writing on computer, handing in by mail systematical digital annotation and evaluation (using

Markin) of all components (from orthography and punctuation to text linguistic features)

positive and critical annotations, aiming at the assimilation of typical Spanish structures


Pero... ¿Qué porcentaje de los términos nuevos que

uno registra/aprende se pierden en menos de 24 horas?

Respuesta: un 80%

“3 ing”: Motivating writing teaching (ii)


“3 ing”: Motivating writing teaching (iii)

>> make learning how to write more conscious

and recurrent

>> blended learning setting with phased

multi-stage coaching


“3 ing”: Motivating writing teaching (iv)

1st stage: digital annotations providing keys and statistics, not answers

keys/labels focussing on solution, not on error:

• when using adv. instead of adj.: “wrong or insufficient use of adj.”

understanding, not on reproduction:• 3 instead of 1 label “misspell”: “bad application of

spelling system” / “lexeme ok, wrong spelling” / “form ok, wrong spelling”


“3 ing”: Motivating writing teaching (v)

if necessary: notes limited individual and collective statistics general comment (and grade?) invitation to reflection + consultation and evaluation

of sources providing possible answers + self evaluation

starting with group tasks > students can get more confident and learn from each other

2nd stage: class discussion of recurrent and typical items


“3 ing”: Motivating writing teaching (vi)

3th stage: opportunities for individual feedback

4th stage: Writing Portfolio original + corrected versions of all tasks individual drafts of group tasks + peer review for each task: self evaluation, compared to earlier

tasks: what was good/better/worse, including with regard to the use of instruments

>> evaluation, based on the student’s progress


“3 ing”: Motivating writing teaching (vii)

conclusions of the experiment: more systematic, focussing both on cognitive

and metacognitive aspects less time-consuming better return more motivating for both student and coach first insight in characteristics, objectives and

final attainments per career and per level embedded in overall view on language teaching


“4 ing”: Investigating motivating writing teaching (i)

enlarge corpus (2 language careers, 3 institutions, 3 years)

uniformize labelset into criteriology for the systematic analysis of the enlarged corpus

statistic analysis of the points of interest in output of writing tasks per career, level and institution > broad insight in objectives and final attainments

more extensive inquiry of the return (comparison with the “traditional” output)


“4 ing”: Investigating motivating writing teaching (ii)

develop linked XML-database with examples of points of interest

XML-coding > dynamic publishing in webbased learning

environment with database, exercises and “learner corpus”

static publishing in book form


“4 ing”: Investigating motivating writing teaching (iii)

possible extensions of methodology: other languages other language learning components

5ing..??


I’m wondering if...

Para más información:

[email protected]

“4ing”

Documents

teaching writing iv2

teaching writing iii2

teaching writing ii2ing

teaching writing viinor

teaching writing i2ing

characteristics output

inefficient2 ing

career3 ing