论文部分内容阅读
【摘要】本文旨在为英语作为外语的环境，尤其中国的大学英语写作教学提出一些有建设性且可行的建议。首先阐述了有关写作方法的两个定义，然后具体讨论了大学英语写作教学存在的问题，最后提出了有利于提高语言学习者写作水平的一些值得关注的策略。
【关键词】英语写作教学 过程写作法 结果写作法
I. Introduction
The importance of writing as a fundamental objective of education is no less valid or practical. Writing extends far beyond using words or mastering grammar. Writing is best considered as a complex intellectual activity that requires students to sharpen their analytical minds， and make accurate distinctions. More than a way of learning， writing is an act of discovery. However， writing in a second or foreign language is an acknowledged difficulty for a majority of English as a foreign language （EFL） and English as a second language （ESL） students at different levels. Writing is no simple task and the ability to write is generally learned in a formal setting. As writing is a learned skill， a clearer understanding of the writing process， a better awareness of how writing skills develop， should lead to more appropriate teaching methodologies for writing instruction. There is a great need for language teachers to help students develop their skills as well as knowledge of the contexts in which writing happens.
II. Theoretical Framework
1. The process approach
The process approach treats all writing as a creative act which requires time and positive feedback. The process approach focuses on how writers generate ideas， record them， and refine them in order to form a text. In process writing， the teacher is no longer someone who just assigns students a writing topic and receives the finished product for correction without any intervention in the writing process itself. Flower and Hayes[1]established the model of writing processes： planning， writing， and reviewing. They suggest that the best way to model the writing process is to study a writer's thinking aloud protocols as the principle research tool， thus capturing a detailed record of what is going on in the writer's mind. Response is crucial in assisting learners to move through the stages of the writing process， and various means of providing feedback are used， including teacher-student conferences， peer response， audio taped feedback， and reformulation.[2]
In spite of the fact that the process approach emphasize the writer's independent self， it has its drawbacks[3]. The disadvantages of the process approach are that they often regard all writing as being produced by the same set of processes and they offer learners insufficient input， particularly， in terms of linguistics knowledge， to write successfully. Horowits[4]also raises cautions about the process approach saying that the process-oriented approach fails to prepare students for at least on essential type of academic writing， overuse of peer evaluation may leave students with an unrealistic view of their abilities， and the process-oriented approach gives students a false impression of how college writing will be evaluated. 2. The product approach
According to Coffin et al.[5]， in the past， much emphasis has been placed on 'text as product' in the teaching of writing in higher education. The focus of such teaching has been on the correctness of textual aspects such as spelling， text structure， vocabulary and style. Therefore， text approaches mainly refers to the different types of knowledge necessary for coherent and appropriate writing. Such research tends to concentrate on analyses of the written text and， more recently， on how texts are constructed. Much textlinguistics research available focuses on the syntactic level of texts： syntactic analyses of texts， corpus research， the informational structure of sentences， and the cohesion of texts all tend to emphasize that the text comes about as a result of what the writer knows about language as well as the written mode of language. Because of the emphasis of early versions of text-based approaches on the text as product， there was obviously not much focus on how the writer actually got to the point of producing an appropriate academic text.
In short， product-based approaches see writing as mainly concerned with knowledge about the structure of language， and writing development as mainly the result of the imitation of input， in the form of texts provided by the teacher.[6]，
III. Major existing issues in English writing instruction
Based on teaching experiences， the author discusses the major existing issues of writing instruction for Chinese university students.
First， limited periods of writing instruction.
In college English teaching， writing hasn't been treated as an independent course but combined with the intensive reading. Owing to limited periods of writing instruction， weight attached to writing is insufficient. Although speaking and writing as the two main outputs are two means of achieving communicative competence， it is not in direct proportion to the significance of writing in language learning.
Second， lack of feasible writing materials.
Effective and workable writing materials are still in great demand. College English integrated textbooks deals with writing， but they often lack in systematic style. Partly owing to the fact mentioned above， teachers engaged in the teaching of intensive reading have trouble boosting students' writing skills detailedly， while students involved in this learning activity have no enough enthusiasm to perform this time-consuming task. Third， high emphasis on grammatical form.
It is a fact that much of writing instruction attaches great importance to traditional grammar-dominated approach. It mainly refers to knowledge about language structure and the imitation of input. This approach focuses on the accurate application of grammatical rules. In other words， Chinese writing class stresses using correct grammar， using a range of vocabulary and sentence structures， punctuating meaningfully， and spelling exactly. Grammar instruction is always isolated from the real context and fail to find a close relationship between grammatical form and real communication. In addition， another big problem is that even if students have developed a large vocabulary， their vocabulary cannot be used freely in practice.
Fourth， heavy emphasis on the final product.
Chinese university students often hold the idea that writing is a linear process， in which they follow fixed steps， such as Pre-reading， Write， and Re-write. However， in fact， it is claimed that writing is a recursive process[7]，， which allows students to go back and forth while writing in order to support or modify the initial ideas. Because of stress on the final product， the constructive interaction between a teacher and students never or seldom exists. Writing instruction without interaction seldom witnesses the development of writing competence.
Fifth， the need for more various types of feedback.
Chinese students get used to being given instructions and authoritative feedback from the teachers. Students passively write for the teacher， not for themselves. Feedback is usually a judgment on what students accomplish. Students often feel frustrated or even disheartened by the feedback they receive on written assignments. In terms of this， feedback is not only about offering the appropriate feedback at the appropriate time， but also about how this feedback can have an active influence on students. Thus， it is clear that the idea of writing as a process and offering appropriate feedback at the correct stage is crucial for providing digestible feedback on students' writing.
IV. Strategies applied in English writing instruction
First， considering learners' needs in writing.
The amount and type of support or 'scaffolding' offered to students will depend， to a large extent， on their specific needs. Coffin et al.[8]，note that："For successful scaffolding to take place， lectures need to know where the students is starting from and aiming for in the process of learning." Students are often blind to their purposes in the process of writing as a result of complexity and high requirements of writing. Thus， ultimate success or gradual progress is hard to achieve. Writing instructors should be familiar with students' levels and needs in order to generate students' productive use of ideas through group discussions on both the design and implementation of writing courses. Second， creating a learning environment where students can explore and find their own voices.
The majority of students have been exposed to learning situations in which they either write from personal experience， or from a single source， usually either the textbook or a similarly significant text. Writing instructors shouldn't offer a competitive environment but a non-threatening and healthy one where students can find their own voices and express what they think and what they want actively and freely， where they write for themselves， not for teachers or exams. Students who have a hard time in finding relevant information and struggle to judge the contextual usefulness of information should be paid more attention and given more guidance.
Third， balancing form and function.
Batstone[9]，summarizes the product and the process approach to teaching grammar： in the product perspective， grammar is regarded as essentially a formal framework- a set of categories and forms. But， instead of thinking of grammar in light of an analytic display of separate forms， the process perspective considers grammar as dynamic， as a resource which language users exploit as they make their way through discourse. Thus， the distinction is between "the careful control of language for learner （as in product）， and the creative use of language by the learner （as in process）". Students who take writing courses in EFL countries are likely to attach more importance to forms and structures than functions. Owing to the fact that writing class in China universities place stress on grammatical rules and skills， a more balanced approach between linguistic form and function must be required. Thus， writing instructors need to make the issue clear that language forms and structures are useful， but the relation between language structures and the roles they play in conveying appropriate meaning is more important.
Fourth， providing meaningful and productive feedback.〖HJ1.8mm〗
While feedback to written text is probably essential for the development of writing skills， there is less certainty about who should give the response， the form it should take， and whether it should focus more on ideas or on forms. However， teacher's written feedback is still highly valued by second language writers， and many writers particularly favor their feedback on their grammar[10]，. In Chinese writing instruction， teachers' written feedback cannot be ignored， but excessive attention to student errors may make writing only an exercise that practices grammar and vocabulary rather than a way to express meaning. Therefore， in addition to teacher's written feedback， Chinese writing teachers need to apply a variety of feedback， such as teacher-student discussion， peer feedback or in-class grammar instruction. Using a wide range of forms of feedback will help students actively participate in writing， acquire the skills to revise their own writing， and to some extent， reduce teachers' workload. Ⅴ. Conclusion
In EFL contexts， language learners' exposure to English is quite limited， so more effective and feasible approaches should be explored and applied to writing instruction. The process approach and the product approach have both benefits and drawbacks so that it is believed that complementary use of the approaches better helps students facilitate their writing.
References
[1] Flower， L. and Hayes， J. （1981）. A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication， 32， 365-387
[2] Hyland， K. （2003）. Second Language Writing. Cambridge： Cambridge University Press
[3] Bazerman， C. （1980）. A relationship between reading and writing： The controversial model. College English， 41， 656-661
[4] Horowitz， D.H. （1986）. What professors actually require： Academic tasks for the ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly， 20， PPP
[5] Coffin， C.， Curry， M. J.， Goodman， S.， Hewings， A.， Lillis， T. M.， & Swann， J.（2003） . Teaching Academic Writing，11. London： Routledge.
[6] Badger， R， & White， b. （2000）. A process genre approach to teaching writing.
ELF Journal， 54， 153-160
[7] Zamel， V. （1983）. The composing processes of advanced ESL students： six case studies. TESOL Quarterly， 17， 165-187
[8] Coffin， C.， Curry， M. J.， Goodman， S.， Hewings， A.， Lillis， T. M.， & Swann， J.（2003） . Teaching Academic Writing，12. London： Routledge.
[9] Batstone， R. （1994）. Grammar. New Yoork： Oxford.
[10] Leki， I. （1990） Coaching from the margins： Issues in written response. In B. Kroll （Eds.）， Second language writing： research insights for the classroom. Cambridge： Cambridge University Press
【关键词】英语写作教学 过程写作法 结果写作法
I. Introduction
The importance of writing as a fundamental objective of education is no less valid or practical. Writing extends far beyond using words or mastering grammar. Writing is best considered as a complex intellectual activity that requires students to sharpen their analytical minds， and make accurate distinctions. More than a way of learning， writing is an act of discovery. However， writing in a second or foreign language is an acknowledged difficulty for a majority of English as a foreign language （EFL） and English as a second language （ESL） students at different levels. Writing is no simple task and the ability to write is generally learned in a formal setting. As writing is a learned skill， a clearer understanding of the writing process， a better awareness of how writing skills develop， should lead to more appropriate teaching methodologies for writing instruction. There is a great need for language teachers to help students develop their skills as well as knowledge of the contexts in which writing happens.
II. Theoretical Framework
1. The process approach
The process approach treats all writing as a creative act which requires time and positive feedback. The process approach focuses on how writers generate ideas， record them， and refine them in order to form a text. In process writing， the teacher is no longer someone who just assigns students a writing topic and receives the finished product for correction without any intervention in the writing process itself. Flower and Hayes[1]established the model of writing processes： planning， writing， and reviewing. They suggest that the best way to model the writing process is to study a writer's thinking aloud protocols as the principle research tool， thus capturing a detailed record of what is going on in the writer's mind. Response is crucial in assisting learners to move through the stages of the writing process， and various means of providing feedback are used， including teacher-student conferences， peer response， audio taped feedback， and reformulation.[2]
In spite of the fact that the process approach emphasize the writer's independent self， it has its drawbacks[3]. The disadvantages of the process approach are that they often regard all writing as being produced by the same set of processes and they offer learners insufficient input， particularly， in terms of linguistics knowledge， to write successfully. Horowits[4]also raises cautions about the process approach saying that the process-oriented approach fails to prepare students for at least on essential type of academic writing， overuse of peer evaluation may leave students with an unrealistic view of their abilities， and the process-oriented approach gives students a false impression of how college writing will be evaluated. 2. The product approach
According to Coffin et al.[5]， in the past， much emphasis has been placed on 'text as product' in the teaching of writing in higher education. The focus of such teaching has been on the correctness of textual aspects such as spelling， text structure， vocabulary and style. Therefore， text approaches mainly refers to the different types of knowledge necessary for coherent and appropriate writing. Such research tends to concentrate on analyses of the written text and， more recently， on how texts are constructed. Much textlinguistics research available focuses on the syntactic level of texts： syntactic analyses of texts， corpus research， the informational structure of sentences， and the cohesion of texts all tend to emphasize that the text comes about as a result of what the writer knows about language as well as the written mode of language. Because of the emphasis of early versions of text-based approaches on the text as product， there was obviously not much focus on how the writer actually got to the point of producing an appropriate academic text.
In short， product-based approaches see writing as mainly concerned with knowledge about the structure of language， and writing development as mainly the result of the imitation of input， in the form of texts provided by the teacher.[6]，
III. Major existing issues in English writing instruction
Based on teaching experiences， the author discusses the major existing issues of writing instruction for Chinese university students.
First， limited periods of writing instruction.
In college English teaching， writing hasn't been treated as an independent course but combined with the intensive reading. Owing to limited periods of writing instruction， weight attached to writing is insufficient. Although speaking and writing as the two main outputs are two means of achieving communicative competence， it is not in direct proportion to the significance of writing in language learning.
Second， lack of feasible writing materials.
Effective and workable writing materials are still in great demand. College English integrated textbooks deals with writing， but they often lack in systematic style. Partly owing to the fact mentioned above， teachers engaged in the teaching of intensive reading have trouble boosting students' writing skills detailedly， while students involved in this learning activity have no enough enthusiasm to perform this time-consuming task. Third， high emphasis on grammatical form.
It is a fact that much of writing instruction attaches great importance to traditional grammar-dominated approach. It mainly refers to knowledge about language structure and the imitation of input. This approach focuses on the accurate application of grammatical rules. In other words， Chinese writing class stresses using correct grammar， using a range of vocabulary and sentence structures， punctuating meaningfully， and spelling exactly. Grammar instruction is always isolated from the real context and fail to find a close relationship between grammatical form and real communication. In addition， another big problem is that even if students have developed a large vocabulary， their vocabulary cannot be used freely in practice.
Fourth， heavy emphasis on the final product.
Chinese university students often hold the idea that writing is a linear process， in which they follow fixed steps， such as Pre-reading， Write， and Re-write. However， in fact， it is claimed that writing is a recursive process[7]，， which allows students to go back and forth while writing in order to support or modify the initial ideas. Because of stress on the final product， the constructive interaction between a teacher and students never or seldom exists. Writing instruction without interaction seldom witnesses the development of writing competence.
Fifth， the need for more various types of feedback.
Chinese students get used to being given instructions and authoritative feedback from the teachers. Students passively write for the teacher， not for themselves. Feedback is usually a judgment on what students accomplish. Students often feel frustrated or even disheartened by the feedback they receive on written assignments. In terms of this， feedback is not only about offering the appropriate feedback at the appropriate time， but also about how this feedback can have an active influence on students. Thus， it is clear that the idea of writing as a process and offering appropriate feedback at the correct stage is crucial for providing digestible feedback on students' writing.
IV. Strategies applied in English writing instruction
First， considering learners' needs in writing.
The amount and type of support or 'scaffolding' offered to students will depend， to a large extent， on their specific needs. Coffin et al.[8]，note that："For successful scaffolding to take place， lectures need to know where the students is starting from and aiming for in the process of learning." Students are often blind to their purposes in the process of writing as a result of complexity and high requirements of writing. Thus， ultimate success or gradual progress is hard to achieve. Writing instructors should be familiar with students' levels and needs in order to generate students' productive use of ideas through group discussions on both the design and implementation of writing courses. Second， creating a learning environment where students can explore and find their own voices.
The majority of students have been exposed to learning situations in which they either write from personal experience， or from a single source， usually either the textbook or a similarly significant text. Writing instructors shouldn't offer a competitive environment but a non-threatening and healthy one where students can find their own voices and express what they think and what they want actively and freely， where they write for themselves， not for teachers or exams. Students who have a hard time in finding relevant information and struggle to judge the contextual usefulness of information should be paid more attention and given more guidance.
Third， balancing form and function.
Batstone[9]，summarizes the product and the process approach to teaching grammar： in the product perspective， grammar is regarded as essentially a formal framework- a set of categories and forms. But， instead of thinking of grammar in light of an analytic display of separate forms， the process perspective considers grammar as dynamic， as a resource which language users exploit as they make their way through discourse. Thus， the distinction is between "the careful control of language for learner （as in product）， and the creative use of language by the learner （as in process）". Students who take writing courses in EFL countries are likely to attach more importance to forms and structures than functions. Owing to the fact that writing class in China universities place stress on grammatical rules and skills， a more balanced approach between linguistic form and function must be required. Thus， writing instructors need to make the issue clear that language forms and structures are useful， but the relation between language structures and the roles they play in conveying appropriate meaning is more important.
Fourth， providing meaningful and productive feedback.〖HJ1.8mm〗
While feedback to written text is probably essential for the development of writing skills， there is less certainty about who should give the response， the form it should take， and whether it should focus more on ideas or on forms. However， teacher's written feedback is still highly valued by second language writers， and many writers particularly favor their feedback on their grammar[10]，. In Chinese writing instruction， teachers' written feedback cannot be ignored， but excessive attention to student errors may make writing only an exercise that practices grammar and vocabulary rather than a way to express meaning. Therefore， in addition to teacher's written feedback， Chinese writing teachers need to apply a variety of feedback， such as teacher-student discussion， peer feedback or in-class grammar instruction. Using a wide range of forms of feedback will help students actively participate in writing， acquire the skills to revise their own writing， and to some extent， reduce teachers' workload. Ⅴ. Conclusion
In EFL contexts， language learners' exposure to English is quite limited， so more effective and feasible approaches should be explored and applied to writing instruction. The process approach and the product approach have both benefits and drawbacks so that it is believed that complementary use of the approaches better helps students facilitate their writing.
References
[1] Flower， L. and Hayes， J. （1981）. A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication， 32， 365-387
[2] Hyland， K. （2003）. Second Language Writing. Cambridge： Cambridge University Press
[3] Bazerman， C. （1980）. A relationship between reading and writing： The controversial model. College English， 41， 656-661
[4] Horowitz， D.H. （1986）. What professors actually require： Academic tasks for the ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly， 20， PPP
[5] Coffin， C.， Curry， M. J.， Goodman， S.， Hewings， A.， Lillis， T. M.， & Swann， J.（2003） . Teaching Academic Writing，11. London： Routledge.
[6] Badger， R， & White， b. （2000）. A process genre approach to teaching writing.
ELF Journal， 54， 153-160
[7] Zamel， V. （1983）. The composing processes of advanced ESL students： six case studies. TESOL Quarterly， 17， 165-187
[8] Coffin， C.， Curry， M. J.， Goodman， S.， Hewings， A.， Lillis， T. M.， & Swann， J.（2003） . Teaching Academic Writing，12. London： Routledge.
[9] Batstone， R. （1994）. Grammar. New Yoork： Oxford.
[10] Leki， I. （1990） Coaching from the margins： Issues in written response. In B. Kroll （Eds.）， Second language writing： research insights for the classroom. Cambridge： Cambridge University Press