The Importance of Language Diversity in ESL Writing Workgroups

By Aseel Kanakri

The University of Akron

Aims of the Study

To examine the impact of language variation on students’ writing skills in ESL writing workgroups.

To see if students learn better through peer instruction or peer feedback when English is the only means of communication.

To turn the language barrier into an incentive to improve language fluency.

Theoretical Framework

A theory in second language literacy instruction known as Task-Based Instruction (TBI) is used to support the argument of this study.

TBI emphasizes student-centered instruction that involves group work as opposed to teacher-centered instruction.

The TBI approach will be more effective in ESL classes if language variation is considered when assigning groups to complete a task.

Study Subjects

The students included in this study are all international students at a university in Northeast Ohio taking an advanced ESL writing class in Spring 2012.

The section had 17 students. 8 of them were Chinese (6 males and 2 females). There were also 7 Saudi students (4 males and 3 females). The rest were one male Japanese student and one female Taiwanese student.

Methodology

Writing Teachers’ Questionnaires

Class Observations

Group Writing Samples

Individual Writing Samples

The Teachers’ Responses

15 writing teachers were approached to fill out the questionnaires. 8 of them filled out and returned the questionnaires.

All 8 teachers who responded use workgroups. 3 of them use it twice a week, and the rest use it

at least once a week. Groups usually have 3-4 students First language, class performance, gender, and

student preferences are the main criteria reported for dividing students into groups.

Each class has between 3 to 4 different languages.

The Teachers’ Responses Continued…

7 out of 8 teachers said that when all of the students in the same group speak the same first language , they tend to use their language instead of English most of the times. One teacher reported that this happens only on rare occasions.

All teachers strongly agree that this method of dividing the students into groups based on language variation benefits the students’ learning of writing.

2. Classroom Observation

6 class meetings were observed over the course of a 7-week quarter, and, in all of these classes, students worked in groups. With the help of the teacher, the same group members always worked together.

There were four groups:Group 1: Arabic speakers only (All Saudis 4 students)Group 2: Chinese speakers only (All Chinese 4 students)Group 3: Chinese and Arabic Speakers (3 Chinese, 1

Taiwanese, 1 Saudi)Group 4: Chinese, Arabic and Japanese speakers (2

Saudis, 1 Chinese, and 1 Japanese)

Class Observation Analysis

Most students looked excited when divided into groups

The first group was active but their enthusiasm died out quickly. They spoke about unrelated topics when the teacher was not around. They used Arabic a lot.

The second group spoke too quietly and whispered to one another in Chinese from time to time especially when the teacher was not around. Electronic translators were used a lot in this group too.

Group three were more active than the first two groups, but not all of them were engaged enough in the discussion or the writing. Chinese was used along with electronic translators.

Group four looked the most active group. On rare occasions first languages were used especially towards the end of group time.

Class Observation Analysis Continued…

3. Writing Samples

6 writing samples were collected from each group.

Other samples of writing done individually were collected from all of students to compare with their writings within the group.

The analysis of the samples focuses on common ESL writing problems such as idea development, organization, spelling, verb forms, use of prepositions, fragments, parallel structure, and punctuation.

Analysis of Group Writing Samples

Groups with Same Language Groups with Different Languages

•Less Organized•Limited vocabulary•Subject verb agreement errors•Verb form mistakes •(due to L1 interference)•Punctuation, esp. with commas •Mistakes in prepositions (due to literal translation)•Spelling mistakes

•Better organization

•Pretty good choice of vocabulary.

•Preposition mistakes

•Punctuation, esp. with commas

•Fewer spelling mistakes

Analysis of Individual Writing Samples

Common Problems in Individual Writing Samples

Repetition and redundancy

Weak argument and support Many Chinese students have verb tense problems (L1 interference)

Many Arabic students have verb to-be and subject verb agreement problems (L1 interference

Literal translation and electronic translation (word choice + structure)

Parallel structure, fragments, and spelling mistakes.

Conclusions

1. When comparing group writing samples and individual samples, I noticed that the individual writing samples don’t show so much differences between the students. However, writings done in groups varied depending on linguistic diversity.

2. When English is the only way to communicate with other members of the group, students try to prove their English skills. They tend to spend more time on editing and reviewing.

3. There is a similarity in the mistake patterns in the writings of the students who come from the same country. This may be a result of cultural background, L1 interference, or the educational system in their native countries.

4. When groups include speakers of different languages, students tend to correct each other’s mistakes. They feel more comfortable using English and they take comments and other viewpoints more seriously.