This study reports the effects of text chat on EFL students’ writing fluency, accuracy, and complexity, investigating whether its effects differ according to the interlocutor. The experimental design employed three text chat groups: one between two nonnative speakers (NNS-NNS); another between a nonnative speaker and a native speaker (NNS-NS); and the other between a nonnative speaker and a nativelike chatbot (NNS-NC). 78 college students of English as a foreign language between 19 to 22 years old were sampled and assigned into the three groups, each consisting of 30, 20, and 28, respectively. Over a 16-week period, they engaged in ten 10-minute-long chat sessions. All groups were tested before and after the treatment. A paired-samples t-test was conducted to compare preand post-test scores as far as fluency, accuracy, and complexity concerned. To find out the differences between mean scores of the groups, a one-way analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was run. Results indicated that all three groups showed significant improvement in accuracy while only NNS-NS and NNS-NC groups did in fluency. No effects for complexity were evident. In terms of group differences, no statistical significance was detected. Participants’ perceptions of English learning and text chat positively changed overall. This study has pedagogical implications for EFL teachers, students, and researchers.

Using conversation analysis (CA), this study examines the less explored languageteaching genre within an English as a foreign language (EFL) context: the writing center tutorials. Focusing the analysis specifically on tutor talk, this paper investigates the contingent production of third turns of second language (L2) tutors. Following the lead of Lee’s (2007) study of teachers’ third turns in classroom discourse, this study used CA to analyze audio-recorded tutoring sessions conducted in English. The analyses highlight five ways in which tutors make use of the third turn position in an IRF sequence to maneuver the tutorials, specifically contingent on the two types of student response in the second turn. Based on the analytic findings that illuminate the diverse functions of the tutors’ third turns, this study concludes with pedagogical implications for English-mediated writing center tutorials in EFL contexts.

By examining two low-proficiency EFL students’ experiences of reading literature, and of writing about what they have read during a semester-long reading/writing course, we investigate literature’s place in EFL writing classes. We also observe whether using literature in EFL writing classes lead to successful synergies among LW (learning-to-write), WLL (writing-to-learn language), and WLC (writing-tolearn content). We adopt a case study methodology. The participants, Mia and Sun, are first-year students who attend a private university in Seoul. Both students favor the inclusion of literature in the reading-writing classroom. Mia experiences the literature-reading-writing connection mainly as language knowledge, with the strong appreciation for WLL perspective. By comparison, Sun concerns for LW dimensions of writing, together with the WLL perspective. This study provides evidence that literature-reading-writing connection serves as a vehicle not only for a rich reading experience but also for the synergistic learning of writing, content, and language.

The present study aimed at exploring the differences in EFL learners’ writing performance in two writing modes (direct and translated writing) in two writing genres (argumentation and narration) depending upon their L2 writing proficiency. For this study, 46 college freshmen (43.5% of high level and 56.5% of low level) performed four writing tasks individually. The results of the study are as follows: 1) their writing performance in the direct mode was significantly better regardless of genre and L2 writing proficiency, although there were substantial differences between the two genres in the degree of significance; 2) their writing performance in argumentative prose was significantly better only in the direct mode; and 3) only for low-level learners in the direct mode, there were significant differences in their performance in the writing genre, favoring argumentation. Theoretical and pedagogical relevance of the findings is addressed.

Despite extensive research attention that has been paid to second language (SL) or foreign language (FL) learners’ argumentative writing, most research has focused on the structural features characteristic of such writers. There have not been many systematic attempts to identify the quality of argument features SL or FL writers rely on, and how they contribute to the overall writing qualities. This study was designed to examine the relationship between the Toulmin elements, widely used measures of content qualities in arguments which include claims, data, warrants, rebuttals, qualifiers, and backings, and the overall qualities of advanced Korean high school EFL learners’ argumentative writing. Each of the thirty three participants’ argumentative writing was analyzed, applying the Toulmin model, and the results demonstrate that their overall argument qualities were closely related to the uses of the fundamental Toulmin elements, especially data and predicted best by the degree to which each claim was supported with relevant and sufficient data. These findings shed light on the need for instruction on the use of Toulmin elements in enhancing the overall quality of Korean EFL learners’ argumentative writing.

Metadiscourse has been recognized as an important aspect of effective persuasive discourse. In this study, we explore how metadiscourse features are deployed by 34 EFL undergraduate students to make their non-discipline persuasive texts effective. We find that students grasp at least some of the metadiscourse resources available to them, but are relatively limited in rhetorical sophistication. In fact, transitions, frame markers, code glosses and hedges were found to be critical elements contributing to student writing quality. The findings also show that both frequency and diversity of frame markers are positive predictors of overall writing quality. We also investigate the linguistic forms of metadiscourse used by the students to project stance in their writing. The students were found to have difficulty handling the range of stance construction they could take, and this was unfortunately couched in single-word modal verbs. Teachers should make the metadiscourse features of persuasive writing explicit to students to assist them in making stronger arguments.

This study examines how native English speaking (NES) and Korean non-native English speaking (KNES) teachers assess L2 writing performance. More specifically, this study aims to investigate whether these two groups of raters evaluate writing samples differently when using different rating scales (holistic vs. analytic) and different task types (narrative vs. argumentative). Four NES and four KNES raters evaluated 78 narrative and 78 argumentative essays written by Korean EFL university students using both holistic and analytic rating rubrics. The comparison between the two rater groups indicated that the scores given by the two groups were statistically significantly different for both holistic and analytic ratings regardless of the two task types investigated. Overall, KNES teachers rated the essays more harshly than their NES counterparts, irrespective of task type and rating scale. Multiple regression analysis of five analytic sub-criteria revealed that the two rater groups demonstrated similar patterns in assessing argumentative essays, while for narrative essays, the relative influence of each analytic sub-criterion on overall writing quality differed for the two rater groups. Implications for L2 writing assessment are included.

The issue of text appropriation is rarely explored in EFL classrooms where the teachers are native speakers of English. In this study we highlight how the ideology of NESTs influences students’ feedback practices. Two Korean EFL students seemingly welcomed teacher comments into their texts to make their revision process more manageable. By relinquishing their control, they welcome the appropriative behavior the teacher brings as the native English speaker. They believe that appropriating the behavior of the native English-speaking teacher is not only beneficial, but necessary in shaping their English discourse. Nonetheless, the students struggled in the feedback and revision cycles to negotiate between their hegemonic beliefs and the expectations of their native English-speaking teacher. In this sense, EFL students’ writing is always in foreclosure from the native English-speaking teachers, as EFL students are overshadowed by the ideology of NESTs.

This study examined how Chinese college students react to their writing teachers’ corrective feedback (CF). A total of 1,077 students completed a survey questionnaire consisting of two parts: participants’ general information and their reactions to teachers’ CF. It was found that students had positive feelings towards CF, and that they gave the most attention to the problems at the micro-level. They believed that teacher CF could help them greatly with revision in organization, vocabulary, and grammar, but that it was not so helpful with problems in content. Failure to comprehend or make corrections based on their teacher CF was reported. In such cases, some students tended to employ very limited strategies, or they responded to CF in a passive manner. Accordingly, it is suggested that further qualitative research also be conducted to obtain a fuller and finer picture of students’ reactions to their teacher’s CF on their writings.

This study investigated the effects of types of post-reading instructional scaffolds on university-level English as a foreign language (EFL) learners’ WebQuest writing performance. One hundred twenty students, randomly selected from 8 EFL classes at a Korean university, were randomly assigned to one of three treatment conditions: (a) online Instructional Conversation (IC), (b) online recitation, or (c) no post-reading instructional scaffold (i.e., control). After reading WebQuest texts, the online IC and online recitation groups received their treatments, using an Internet-based synchronous textual communication tool as a medium for communication. The control group, on the other hand, did not receive any post-reading instructional scaffold and continued to read the WebQuest texts for the same amount of time that the IC and recitation groups received their treatments. Results showed that the online IC group outperformed one or both of the other two groups in overall WebQuest writing performance and in the specific areas of overall writing quality and content. Implications are discussed in both theoretical and practical terms.

The present study aims to explore the factors affecting Korean EFL high school students’ choice of picture options with key expressions in a writing test prompt, as well as the effects of option position and contents on their performance. It further aims to examine whether these effects vary with English writing proficiency. The performance of lower- and higher-level students in two prompts was analyzed along with their reasons for their choices. The prompt had three picture options with two key expressions in each option; the students chose one picture option and wrote a 20-word message declining a request using a reason specified in the option. Significant effects were not found for position within the prompts, but for the content of the options. The participants tended to choose a certain picture option over others mainly because of topical knowledge, difficulty level, or picture preference. The findings suggest a significant effect of picture contents, which yields implications for designing prompts with picture options for score validity.

In second language writing, while much research has focused on teachers’ act of feedback per se, scant attention has been paid to how they attempt to bring innovation to their feedback practices and how they cope with the contextual challenges arising from the innovation. This study seeks to explore two teachers’ perspectives on their own attempts at innovative feedback approaches in their writing classrooms. Drawing on data gathered from individual teacher interviews and their personal reflections, the results of the study show that their engagement in feedback innovation served as a significant source of their continuing professional development. While they encountered some challenges during the innovation, they also exercised their professional agency to address these challenges and reaped benefits from their innovative attempts. The paper concludes with some implications for feedback innovation in EFL contexts and how teachers can be supported in their continuing efforts to develop effective feedback approaches in writing.

When one is reading or writing, various forms of bottom-up knowledge—e.g., grammar, vocabulary, orthography, and the mechanics of written language—interact with the top-down processes at the level of discourse. One of the reasons English language learners encounter a lot of difficulty when they are engaged in academic reading and writing is that they have been taught grammar only at the sentence level and not at the discourse level. In order to illustrate how discourse-based grammar instruction can facilitate the acquisition of academic reading and writing, this paper discusses various ways in which the following four topics can be dealt with at the discourse level: cohesion, the tense and aspect system, comma usage, and existential there. Obviously, discourse-based grammar instruction should be integrated with the teaching of the other top-down and bottom-up skills necessary for academic reading and writing. EFL teachers, however, need to know more about discourse grammar to effectively make their learners aware of it and to offer them learning activities that will contribute to better reading comprehension and written production.

This study investigates how EFL learner error patterns and frequencies differ in writing depending on students' language proficiency levels. A total of 152 Korean EFL students' essays were examined. The writing samples were first scored holistically on an impressionistic basis; then, based on the scores, the samples were grouped into low- and high-proficiency groups. The study identified 13 errors based on prevalence and significance. The study calculated the frequency of each error type committed by each group and compared the results using t-tests. A survey of English teachers was also conducted (N=32) to rate the gravity of each error and to compare the error gravity produced by each group. The result showed that low-proficiency group produced errors much more frequently, and the errors were more serious ones with high error gravity. The errors committed by the high-proficiency group were usually complex ones and occurred in more complicated contexts. The study also found that the errors with less gravity occurred more frequently in both groups and that they tended to be more persistent. The study indicated that although the students were aware of significance of errors, correcting the errors was beyond their current English capability.

The present study investigates Korean university EFL students’ use of conjunctive adverbials (CAs) in argumentative writing. The data for the study consist of a Korean university students’ writing corpus that is divided into three different subcorpora based on proficiency levels, and a reference corpus of American students’ writings. The results show that the nonnative writers in all three groups greatly overused CAs. Examination of their overuse patterns according to different taxonomic types indicated that sequential and additive types were mostly overused, as much as six times more than those by the native writers. In addition, several characteristics of the nonnative writers’ CA usage are discussed, including their heavy dependence on sentence-initial positioning, and both form-related and usage-related misuses of CAs, especially among the lowest-level learners. The study concludes with some pedagogical implications and suggestions.

This paper examines how Korean college EFL students use contrastive conjunctions in their argumentative writing in comparison with native speaker college students’ use of them. The data consists of a Korean college students’ writing corpus, which was divided into a lower proficiency group and a higher proficiency group, and an American and British university students’ writing corpus. The findings reveal that the first two most frequently occurring forms are but and however in all four groups,although the usage patterns such as positioning differ between the NS and the NNS groups. The third most frequent form is on the other hand in both NNS groups and yet in both NS groups, which shows an interesting difference in that the NNS groups hardly use yet in their writing. Both NNS groups also show frequent misuses of conjunctive adverbials such as in contrast, on the contrary, and on the other hand. The paper concludes with some pedagogical implications and suggestions.