11 September - 17 September: Building an empirically based model of EFL learner's writing processes – M. Sasaki

Key Points: This text is about Miyuki Sasaki's research project on L2 writing compared three groups of L2 writers:

1. expert writers (12)
2. novice writers (22)
3. the same novice writers after 12 weeks of instruction in writing process

Sasaki tested 8 hypotheses that she made with the help of a preliminary pilot study. The hypotheses were mostly concerned with planning (global planning and local planning), stopped to reread and revise, and the effects of writing process instruction on the novice writers.

Gathering data to test these hypotheses was a quite a challenge. Previous studies asked test subjects to think out loud while they wrote. Sasaki felt that this method was ineffective because it interfered with the students writing process so she used a technique in which the test subjects watched themselves on video. While watching, they told the researcher what they were thinking at each point in the video.

In this study the test subjects wrote an argumentative essay. One topic was used for the first novice test and a second topic was used for the test given after instruction. The topics of the two test were similar, but they could not be the same.

The text details exactly how the data was gathered. The three sources of data were the texts that the test subjects wrote, observations made while watching the subjects write and the recollections the subjects gave after they wrote. Sasaki evaluated the subjects' text using Jacob's English Composition Profile. From observation she could determine how long it took to write the texts and how long the subjects spent rereading and revising.

Overall, Sasaki concluded form the research project that planning in writing is important, especially global planning.

My interaction with the article: This text was a great introduction into the practice of L2 writing research. Every step of the process was detailed well. Even though I had trouble understanding the coding and mathematical sections of this text, I could get a good idea of how this type of research is done and I found it very interesting.

It would be very easy for me to take what I learned from Sasaki's research into my own classroom. Planning is key. Although, I have a feeling that teaching global planning to novice writers is not that simple. I wondered if the instruction that the novice writers received during the course of this research project included lessons on global planning. If it had, wouldn't that mean different results or is it impossible to simply teach global planning to novice writers.

While reading this text I couldn't help but doubt the methods used. The entire text was an explanation for why the research project was carried out in the way that it was, but I still had many unanswered questions. For example, why couldn't the test subjects use dictionaries? Wouldn't they use them in a real life situation? Why did Sasaki have to pay the novice test subjects and not the expert test subjects? The experts had experience reading about and possibly carrying out such research projects. Could their background knowledge affect the results? And so on. However, upon completing the article I felt satisfied. Even though I had many unanswered questions, I realized that Sasaki did as well. This was not the research project to end all research projects. I was a step in the right direction.

Furthermore, I learned that before a researcher attempts to begin their own study, they must read all the research pertaining to what they intend to prove. Sasaki listed many experiments that pertained to her research project. The research projects do not happen in a vacuum, they are connected to a long line of research.