Résumés
Abstract
In North American university contexts, the language diversity found in English mainstream composition (“L1”) classrooms resembles more and more that found in ESL (“L2”) writing classrooms. As these two groups become less differentiated, those specifically trained in L2 writing might well wonder whether the needs of the non-native speakers of English are acknowledged and addressed in the mainstream classrooms. The author examines several different theoretical constructs that have informed and continue to inform the literature on L1 composition pedagogy, demonstrating that some of these allow for the inclusion of linguistically diverse groups better than others. Fortunately, the recent turn to social and critical approaches to teaching composition reflect well the preoccupations of both L1 and L2 writing teachers. More and more attention is being paid to discussions of “linguistic diversity,” a term which now includes non-native speakers. This suggests a future convergence in the activities of instructors of L1 and L2 writing, leading to benefits for linguistically diverse groups.
Résumé
Au sein des universités nord-américaines, la diversité linguistique des classes ordinaires de composition anglaise (« L1 ») ressemble de plus à plus à ce que l’on retrouve dans les classes de rédaction ALS (« L2 »). Au fur et à mesure que les différences de ces deux groupes s’atténuent, les intervenants formés spécialement en rédaction L2 pourraient fort bien se demander si les besoins des personnes dont la langue maternelle n’est pas l’anglais sont reconnus et pris en compte dans les classes ordinaires. L’auteure examine plusieurs constructions théoriques différentes qui ont étoffé et continuent d’étoffer la littérature sur la pédagogie de la composition L1, démontrant que certaines permettent une meilleure inclusion des groupes ayant des profils linguistiques différents que d’autres. Heureusement, le récent virage favorisant des approches sociales et critiques de l’enseignement de la composition reflète bien les préoccupations des professeurs de rédaction L1 et L2. De plus en plus d’attention est apportée aux discussions sur la « diversité linguistique », un terme qui englobe maintenant les personnes dont la langue maternelle n’est pas l’anglais. Cette situation donne à penser qu’il y aura une convergence dans les activités des professeurs de rédaction L1 et L2, qui entraînera des avantages pour les groupes de divers profils linguistiques.
Veuillez télécharger l’article en PDF pour le lire.
Télécharger
Parties annexes
References
- Atkinson, D., & Ramanathan, V. (1995). Cultures of writing: An ethnographic comparison of L1/L2 university language/writing programs. TESOL Quarterly, 29(3), 539-568.
- Benesch, S. (2001). Critical English for academic purposes: Theory, politics and practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
- Berlin, J. A. (1982). Contemporary composition: The major pedagogical theories. College English 44(8), 765-77.
- Berlin, J. A. (1996). Rhetorics, poetics and cultures: Refiguring college English studies. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
- Bizzell, P. (1992). Cognition, convention, and certainty: What we need to know about writing. PRE/TEXT, 3(3), 213-243.
- Bloom, L. Z., Daiker, D. A. & White, E. M. (Eds.). (2003). Composition studies in the new millennium: Rereading the past, rewriting the future. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
- Boyd, F. B., & Brock, C. H. (Eds.). (2004). Multicultural and multilingual literacy and language: Contexts and practices. New York: The Guilford Press.
- Braine, G. (1996). ESL students in first-year writing courses: ESL versus mainstream classes. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5(2), 91-107.
- Brookes, K. (2002). National culture and the first-year English curriculum: A historical study of “composition” in Canadian universities (parallel American history presented). American Review of Canadian Studies, 32(4), 673-696.
- Burnham, C. (2001). Expressive pedagogy: Practice/theory, theory/practice. In G. Tate, A. Rupiper, & K. Schick (Eds.), A guide to composition pedagogies. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Canagarajah, S. (2001). Critical writing and multilingual students. Ann Arbour, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
- Canagarajah, S. (2002). Multilingual writers and the academic community: Towards a critical relationship. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 1(1), 29-44.
- Canagarajah, S. (2003). Foreward. In G. Smitherman & V. Villanueva (Eds.). Language diversity in the classroom: From intention to practice. (pp. ix-xiv). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
- Conference on College Composition and Communication (2001). Statement on second-language writing and writers. College Composition and Communication, 52(4), 669-674.
- Conference on College Composition and Communication (1974). Students’ right to their own language (1974). College Composition and Communication, 25, 1-32.
- Connor, U. (1996). Contrastive rhetoric: Cross-cultural aspects of second-language writing. New York: CUP.
- Cummins, J., & Swain, M. (1986). Bilingualism in education. New York: Longman.
- D’Angelo, F. J. (1978). An ontological basis for a modern theory of the composing process. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 64(1), 79-85.
- Durst, R. K. (2006). Writing at the postsecondary level. In P. Smagorinsky (Ed.), Research on composition: Multiple perspectives on two decades of change (pp. 141-170). New York: Teachers College Press.
- Elbow, P. (1973). Writing without teachers. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Fairclough, N. (2001). Language and power (2nd Ed.). Harlow, England: Longman.
- Farr, M., & Daniels, H. (1986). Language diversity and writing instruction. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
- Fishman, S. M., & McCarthy, L. (2002). Whose goals whose aspirations? Learning to teach under prepared writers across the curriculum. Logan, Utah: Utah State University Press.
- Flower, L. (1989). Cognition, context, and theory building. College Composition and Communication, 40(3), 282-311.
- Flower, L. (1994). The construction of negotiated meaning: A social cognitive theory of writing. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
- Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365-87.
- Fox, H. (1994). Listening to the world: Cultural issues in academic writing. Urbana, IL: NCTE.
- Gunning, T. G. (2005). Creating literacy instruction for all students (5th Ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
- Hamp-Lyons, L. (1991). Scoring procedures for ESL contexts. In L. Hamp-Lyons (Ed.), Assessing academic writing in academic contexts (pp. 241-276). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.
- Hamp-Lyons, L. (1995). Rating nonnative writing: The trouble with holistic scoring. TESOL Quarterly: 29(4), 759-762.
- Hamp-Lyons, L. (2004). Writing assessment in the world. Assessing Writing, 9(1), 1-3.
- Janopoulos, M. (1992). University of NS and NNS writing errors: A comparison. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1(2), 109-121.
- Johns, A. M. (1991). Interpreting an English competency examination: The frustrations of an ESL science student. Written Communication, 8, 379-401.
- Johns, A. M., & Sipp, M. K. (Eds.). (2004). Diversity in college classrooms: Practices for today’s classrooms. Ann Arbour: The University of Michigan Press.
- Leki, I. (1992). Understanding ESL writers: A guide for teachers. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann-Boynton/Cook.
- Leki, I., & Carson, J. (1997). “Completely different worlds”: EAP and the writing experiences of ESL students in university courses. TESOL Quarterly, 31(1), 39-69.
- Leki, I., Cumming, A., & Silva, T. (2006). Second-language composition teaching and learning. In P. Smagorinsky (Ed.), Research on composition: Multiple perspectives on two decades of change. (pp. 141-170). New York: Teachers College Press.
- Lu, M. Z. (2003). Composition’s word work: Deliberating how to do language. In L. Z. Bloom, D. A. Daiker & E. M. White (Eds.), Composition studies in the new millennium: Rereading the past, rewriting the future. (pp. 193-207). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
- Matsuda, P. K. (1999). Composition studies and ESL writing: A disciplinary division of labor. College Composition and Communication, 50(4), 699-721.
- McLeod, S. (2001). The pedagogy of writing across the curriculum. In G. Tate, A. Rupiper, & K. Schick (Eds.), A guide to composition pedagogies. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Moss, B., & Walters, K. (1993). Re-thinking diversity: Axes of difference in the writing classroom. In L. Odell (Ed.). Theory and practice in the teaching of writing: Re-thinking the discipline. (pp. 132-185). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
- Phillips, L., & Jørgensen, M. W. (2002). Discourse analysis as theory and method. London: Sage Publications.
- Ramanathan, V., & Atkinson, D. (1999). Individualism, academic writing, and ESL writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), 45-75.
- Ramanathan, V., & Kaplan, R. B. (1996). Audience and voice in current L1 composition texts: Some implications for ESL student writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5(1), 21-34.
- Richard-Amato, P. A., & Snow, M. A. (Eds.). (2005). Academic success for English language learners: Strategies for mainstream teachers. White Plains, NY: Pearson Education.
- Ruetten, M. K. (1994). Evaluating students’ performance on proficiency exams. Journal of Second Language Writing, 3(2), 85-96.
- Severino, C., Guerra, J. C., & Butler, J. E. (1997). Introduction. In C. Severino, J. C. Guerra, & J. E. Butler (Eds.), Writing in multicultural settings. (pp. 1-7). New York: The Modern Language Association of America.
- Silva, T. (1993). Toward an understanding of the distinct nature of L2 writing: The ESL research and its implications. TESOL Quarterly, 27(4), 657–77.
- Silva, T. (1997). Differences in ESL and native-English-speaker writing: The research and its implications. In C. Severino, J. C. Guerra, & J. E. Butler (Eds.), Writing in multicultural settings. (pp. 209-219). New York: The Modern Language Association of America.
- Smagorinsky, P. (Ed.). (2006). Research on composition: Multiple perspectives on two decades of change. New York: Teachers College Press.
- Smitherman, G. (2003). The historical struggle for language rights in CCCC. In G. Smitherman & V. Villanueva (Eds.). Language diversity in the classroom: From intention to practice. (pp. 7-39). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
- Smitherman, G., & Villeneuva, V. (Eds.). (2003). Language diversity in the classroom: From intention to practice. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
- Van Dijk, T. A. (Ed.). (1985). Handbook of discourse analysis, volume 4: Discourse analysis in society. London: Academic Press.
- Villanueva, V., Swearington, C. J., & McDowell, S. (2006). Research in rhetoric. In P. Smagorinsky, (Ed.), Research on composition: Multiple perspectives on two decades of change. New York: Teachers College Press.
- White, E. M., Lutz, W. L., & Kamusikiri, S. (Eds.). (1996). Assessment of writing: Politics, policies and practices. New York: The Modern Language Association of America.
- Williams, J. D. (2003). Preparing to teach writing: Research, theory and practise (3rd Ed.). Mahweh, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.