政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/136260
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  全文笔数/总笔数 : 113648/144635 (79%)
造访人次 : 51677140      在线人数 : 587
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜寻范围 查询小技巧：
  • 您可在西文检索词汇前后加上"双引号"，以获取较精准的检索结果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜寻，建议至进阶搜寻限定作者字段，可获得较完整数据
    •  进阶搜寻


    请使用永久网址来引用或连结此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/136260


    题名: 跨語實踐理念於EFL寫作諮詢之個案探究
    Exploring Translingual Practices in EFL Teacher-student Writing Conferences: A Case Study
    作者: 陳建智
    Chen, Chien-Chih
    贡献者: 劉怡君
    Suresh Canagarajah
    Liu, Yi-Chun
    Suresh Canagarajah
    陳建智
    Chen, Chien-Chih
    关键词: 跨語理論
    師生諮詢
    跨語言實踐
    寫作諮詢
    Translingual writing
    Teacher-student conferences
    Agency
    L2 writing
    日期: 2021
    上传时间: 2021-08-04 14:22:31 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 師生諮詢在寫作教學已廣為使用，諮詢提供師生互動的機會且能立刻討論寫作過程遇到的問題。雖然已有許多寫作諮詢的研究，但是情境大多是在大學教育，且諮詢者大多是寫作中心的助教，而非學生的教師 (Nash, Dawson & Gulozer, 2018)。高中教育的師生寫作諮詢研究尚不足，且極少研究探索跨語實踐理論於寫作諮詢的運用。本研究目的是探究跨語實踐理論在台灣高中寫作諮詢的運用。本研究以跨語主義理論框架探究以下三個研究問題: (一) 在跨語諮詢過程，學生使用哪些策略來提升寫作? (二) 跨語諮詢如何影響學生的寫作發展? (三) 跨語諮詢如何有效地幫助學生發展寫作能力?
    本質化個案研究蒐集多重語料，長達一學期，參與者為一台灣高三學生。研究工具包含錄音設備、攝影機、學習背景調查表、寫作引導及訪問問題。語料為學習背景資料、教師教學筆記與講義、參與者的作文、諮詢錄影檔、訪談資料及參與者的省思紀錄。
    本研究發現學生的身分由學習者改變為寫作者，寫作練習的目的也逐漸從文法與字彙移轉為寫作想法及修辭結構。除此之外，學生能善用Canagarajah (2013)提出的跨語溝通策略，並有明顯的跨語轉變及多模態的學習改變。本研究證實，跨語諮詢亦可促進學生寫作技巧的進步。針對教學實務而言，本研究結果認為師生跨語溝通及學生自主的賦予感有助於學生寫作學習，並能讓學生充分表達想法，成為寫作者。
    Teacher-student conferences have been used with prevalence in teaching writing. The conferences offer students a chance to interact with the instructor and instantly discuss their problems in the writing process. Although considerable studies of teacher-student conferences for writing have been conducted, most of them are conducted in tertiary education, and focus on “consultant-student” tutorials in a writing center where conference feedback may be given by a consultant who is not the instructor of the student (Nash, Dawson & Gulozer, 2018), and standard English is regarded as the learning goal. Scant studies explore teacher-student writing conferences in high school EFL contexts, nor is the EFL translingual conference explored. This study investigates teacher-student writing conferences incorporating translingual practices in a high school in Taiwan. Specifically, this study was designed to answer three research questions from the lens of translingualism: 1) What are the strategies employed by an EFL student in a translingual conference? 2) How do translingual conferences affect the EFL student’s literacy development? 3) How effective are translingual conferences in helping the EFL writers develop knowledge of academic writing?
    A qualitative case study was conducted, and multiple data were collected over one semester. The participant, Mark, was a 12th grader in Taiwan. The data collected in this study included survey data, teacher’s instructional notes and materials, the participant’s writing assignments, conference video data, interview data, as well as the participant’s reflections. The findings revealed that through one-semester practices of translingual conferences, the student’s identity was shaped from a learner to a writer, focusing more on idea generation and organization than on grammar in writing; the student’s writing was shifted from form-focused writing to rhetorical-focused writing, and the student made full use of the negotiation strategies suggested by Canagarajah (2013). Finally, the results showed that the student’s written drafts and revisions over ten translingual conferences were improved according to the rubrics of the General Scholastic Ability Test (GSAT). It is suggested that the translingual practices of teacher-student conferences are effective in not only empowering EFL writers’ agency but also in improving their academic writing knowledge.
    參考文獻: References
    Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5–31.
    Boston, C. (2002). The concept of formative assessment. ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation College Park MD.
    Burbules, N., & Rice, S. (1991). Dialogue across Differences: Continuing the Conversation. Harvard Educational Review, 61(4), 393–417.
    Canagarajah, S. (2006). Toward a writing pedagogy of shuttling between languages: Learning from multilingual writers. College English, 68(6), 589-604.
    Canagarajah, S. (2007). Lingua franca English, multilingual communities, and language acquisition. Modern Language Journal, 91(5), 923-939.
    Canagarajah, S. (2011a). Codemeshing in academic writing: Identifying teachable strategies of translanguaging. Modern Language Journal, 95(3), 401-417.
    Canagarajah, S. (2011b). Translanguaging in the classroom: Emerging issues for research and pedagogy. Applied Linguistics Review, 2, 1–27.
    Canagarajah, S. (2012). Teacher Development in a Global Profession: An Autoethnography. TESOL Quarterly, 46(2), 258-279.
    Canagarajah, S. (2013a) Skilled migration and development: portable communicative resources for transnational work. Multilingual Education, 3(1), 1-19.
    Canagarajah, S. (2013b). Negotiating translingual literacy: An enactment. Research in the Teaching of English, 48(1), 40-67.
    Canagarajah, S. (2013c). Translingual practice: Global Englishes and cosmopolitan relations. London: Routledge.
    Canagarajah, S. (Ed) (2013d). Literacy as translingual practice: Between communities and classrooms. London: Routledge.
    Canagarajah, S. (2015). Clarifying the relationship between translingual practice and L2 writing: Addressing learner identities. Applied Linguistics Review, 6(4), 415-440.
    Canagarajah, S. (2016). Translingual writing and teacher development in composition. College English, 78(3), 265-273.
    Canagarajah, S. (2019). Transnational Literacy Autobiographies as Translingual Writing (1st ed.). NY: Routledge.
    Canagarajah, S., & Matsumoto, Y. (2016). Negotiating voice in translingual literacies: from literacy regimes to contact zones. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 38(5), 390–406.
    Charmaz, K. (2000). Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (2nd ed., pp. 509–535). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: Methods for the 21st century.
    Chisholm, JS, Olinger, AR (2017).‘She’s definitely the artist one’: How learner identities mediate multimodal composing. Research in the Teaching of English 52(2), 122–155.
    Consalvo, A., & Maloch, B. (2015). Keeping the teacher at arm’s length: Student resistance in writing conferences in two high school classrooms. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 50(2), 120-132.
    Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2007). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Coronel-Molina, S. M., & Samuelson, B. L. (2017). Language contact and translingual literacies. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 38(5), 379–389.
    Davies, M. A., & Wavering, M. (1999). Alternative assessment: New directions in teaching and learning. Contemporary Education, 71(1), 39.
    Duff, P. A. (2002). The discursive construction of knowledge, identity, and difference: An ethnography of communication in the high school mainstream. Applied Linguistics, 23, 232-289.
    Engestrom, Y. (1987). Learning by Expanding: An Activity Theoretical Approach to Developmental Research. Helsinki, Finland: Orienta-Konsultit.
    Engeström, Y. (1999). Activity theory and individual and social transformation. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R.-L. Punamäki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 19–38). Cambridge University Press.
    Engeström, Y., Miettinen, R., Punamäki-Gitai, R.-L., & International Congress for Research on Activity Theory. (2004). Perspectives on activity theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Ewert, D. E. (2009). L2 writing conference: Investigating teacher talk. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(4), 251-269.
    Escandon, A. (2004). Education/learning resistance in the foreign language classroom: A case study. AIS St Helens Centre for Research in International Education, Research Paper Series, Working Paper (5).
    Fletcher, R. J., & Portalupi, J. A. (2001). Writing workshop: The essential guide. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
    García O., & Wei, L. (2014). Language, Bilingualism and Education. In: Translanguaging: Language, Bilingualism and Education. Palgrave Pivot, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137385765_4
    Greenstein, L. (2010). What teachers really need to know about formative assessment. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
    Goldstein, L., & Conrad, S. (1990). Student input and negotiation of meaning in ESL writing conferences. TESOL Quarterly, 24, 443–460.
    Gulley, B. (2012). Feedback on developmental writing students’ first drafts. Journal of Developmental Education, 36 (1), 16-36.
    Haneda, M. (2007). Modes of Engagement in Foreign Language Writing: An Activity Theoretical Perspective. Canadian Modern Language Review, 64, 297-327.
    Harmer, J. (2004). How to Teach Writing. England: Pearson Education.
    Harris, M. (1986). Teaching one-to-one: The writing conference. Urbana, IL: NCTE.
    Harris, R. (2001). Rethinking Writing. New York: Continuum.
    Herman, J. L., Aschbacher, P. R., & Winters, L. (1992). A Practical Guide to Alternative Assessment (English Language ed.). Alexandria, ASSN for Supervision & Curriculum Development.
    Hirose, K. (2003). Comparing L1 and L2 organizational patterns in the argumentative writing of Japanese EFL students. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 181-209.
    Horner, B., Lu, M.-Z., Royster, J. J., & Trimbur, J. (2011). Language Difference in
    Writing: Toward a the translingual approach. College English, 73(3), 303-321.
    Horner, B., NeCamp, S., & Donahue, C. (2011). Toward a multilingual composition scholarship: from English only to a translingual norm. College Composition & Communication, 63(2), 269-300.
    Hyland, K. (2006). English for academic purposes: An advanced resource book. London: Routledge.
    Illeris, K. (2003). Toward a contemporary and comprehensive theory of learning.International Journal of Lifelong Education, 22, 396-406.
    Jocius, R (2017) Good student/bad student: Situated identities in the figured worlds of school and creative multimodal production. Literacy Research: Theory, Method, and Practice, 66(1), 198–214.
    Kain, D. & Wardle, E. (2002). Activity Theory: An Introduction for the Writing Classroom. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/493321/Activity_Theory_An_Introduction_for_the_Writing_Classroom
    Kaufhold, K. (2018). Creating translanguaging spaces in students’ academic writing practices. Linguistics and Education, 45, 1–9.
    Klein, G. (2013). The Cartoon Introduction to Statistics. Hill & Wamg.
    Kuckartz, U & Rädiker, S. (2019). Analyzing qualitative data with MAXQDA.Berlin, Germany: Springer.
    Lee, I. (2011). Formative Assessment in EFL Writing: An Exploratory Case Study. Changing English, 18(1), 99–111.
    Lee, J. (2016). Beyond Translingual Writing. College English, 79(2), 174-195. Retrieved June 18, 2021, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/44805916
    Li, W., & Hua, Z. (2013). Translanguaging identities and ideologies: Creating transnational space through flexible multilingual practices amongst Chinese university students in the UK. Applied Linguistics, 34(5), 516–535.
    Lier, L. V. (2010). The ecology of language learning: Practice to theory, theory to practice. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 3, 2-6.
    Listyani, L. (2021). Teaching Writing from the Heart: Building EFL Writing Students’ Motivation and Self-Confidence. Academia Letters, 270.
    Lovejoy, K. B., S. Fox, & K. V. Wills. (2009). From Language Experience to Classroom Practice Affirming Linguistic Diversity in Writing Pedagogy. Pedagogy, 9(2), 261–287.
    Lu, M.-Z. (1987). From silence to words: Writing as struggle. College English, 49(4), 437-448.
    Lu, M., & Horner, B. (2016). Introduction: Translingual work. College English, 78(3), 207–218.
    Machado, E., & Hartman, P. (2020). “I Want to Be Pè Adedayo”: Young Children Enacting Resistance in/ through Translingual Writing about Their Names. Research in the Teaching of English, 54, 342–366.
    Martín, C., Hirsu, L., Gonzales, L. and Alvarez, S. P. (2019). Pedagogies of digital composing through a translingual approach. Computers and Composition, 52, 142-157.
    McCarthey, S., & Moje, E. (2002). Identity Matters. Reading Research Quarterly, 37, 228-238.
    McVeigh, B. (2002). Japanese higher education as a myth. New York: M. E. Sharpe.
    Medina, J. (1999). My name is Jorge on both sides of the river. Honesdale, PA: Wordsong.
    Michael-Luna, S., & Canagarajah, S. (2007). Multilingual Academic Literacies: Pedagogical Foundations for Code Meshing in Primary and Higher Education. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice, 4(1), 55–77.
    Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Motlhaka, H., & Makalela, L. (2016) Translanguaging in an academic writing class: Implications for a dialogic pedagogy. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, 34(3), 251-260.
    Nash, G., Dawson, M., &Gulozer, K. (2018). Intersections between tutorial engagement, directive feedback, and critical reflection. Canadian Journal for Studies in Discourse and Writing/Rédactologie, 28, 246-264.
    Norton, B. (2001) “Non-participation, imagined communities and the language classroom.” In Breen, M. P. (ed). Learner contributions to language learning: new directions in research. London: Longman. 159-171.
    Patthey-Chavez, G. G., & Ferris, D. (1997). Writing, conferencing, and the weaving of multi-voiced texts in college composition. Research in the Teaching of English, 31(1), 51-90.
    Petric, B. (2005). Contrastive Rhetoric in the writing classroom: A case study. English for Specific Purposes, 24, 213-228.
    Ralph, N., Birks, M., & Chapman, Y. (2014). Contextual positioning: Using documents as extant data in grounded theory research. SAGE Open, 4(3), 1-7.
    Royster, J. J., & Kirsch, G. E.. (2012). “Critical Imagination.” Feminist Rhetorical Practices: New Horizons for Rhetoric, Composition, and Literacy Studies (Studies in Rhetorics and Feminisms). Southern Illinois University Press.
    Russell, D. R. (1997). Rethinking Genre in School and Society: An Activity Theory Analysis. Written Communication, 14(4), 504–554.
    Saito, H. (1994). Teachers’ practices and students’ preferences for feedback on second language writing: A case study of adult ESL learners. TESL Canada Journal, 11(2), 46–70.
    Sánchez Martín, C., Hirsu, L., Gonzales, L., & Alvarez, S. P. (2019). Pedagogies of Digital Composing through a Translingual Approach. Computers and Composition, 52, 142–157.
    Schreiber, B. R., & Watson, M. (2018). Translingualism ≠ code-meshing: A response to Gevers’ “Translingualism revisited” (2018). Journal of Second Language Writing, 42, 94–97.
    Shvidko, E. (2018). Writing conference feedback as moment-to-moment affiliative relationship building. Journal of Pragmatics, 127, 20-35.
    Singh, S., & Estefan, A. (2018). Selecting a Grounded Theory Approach for Nursing Research. Global Qualitative Nursing Research, 5.
    Smith, B. E., Pacheco, M. B., & de Almeida, C. R. (2017). Multimodal codemeshing: Bilingual adolescents’ processes composing across modes and languages. Journal of Second Language Writing, 36, 6–22.
    Sperling, M. (1991). Dialogues of deliberation: Conversation in the teacher-student writing conference. Written Communication, 8, 131-162.
    Suh, JaeSuk. (2005). Peer feedback interactions in EFL compositions: Written feedback versus oral feedback. English Teaching, 60(3), 91-116.
    Taylor, L. (2021). Discursive stance as a pedagogical tool: Negotiating literate identities in writing conferences. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 21(2), 208–229.
    Tompkins, G. E. (1990). Teaching writing: Balancing process and product. Columbus, Ohio: Merrill Publishing Company.
    Velasco, P., & García, O. (2014). Translanguaging and the Writing of Bilingual Learners. Bilingual Research Journal, 37(1), 6-23.
    Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Warner, M. S. (1998). Advanced college-level ESL students’beliefs about composition feedback (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations.
     
    描述: 博士
    國立政治大學
    英國語文學系
    100551506
    資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0100551506
    数据类型: thesis
    DOI: 10.6814/NCCU202100845
    显示于类别:[英國語文學系] 學位論文

    文件中的档案:

    档案 描述 大小格式浏览次数
    150601.pdf3123KbAdobe PDF20检视/开启


    在政大典藏中所有的数据项都受到原著作权保护.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - 回馈