Japanese learners' self revisions and peer revisions of their written compositions in English

TESOL Quarterly

Volumn 42, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 209-233

  Suzuki, Manami ^a  

^a DOKKYO UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 47749115720     PISSN: 00398322     EISSN: 15457249     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/j.1545-7249.2008.tb00116.x     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
2. Chi, M. T. H. (2000). Self-explaining expository texts: The dual processes of generating inferences and repairing mental models. In R Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology: Educational design and cognitive science (Vol. 5, pp. 161-238). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
3. Connor, U., & Farmer, M. (1990). The teaching of topical structure analysis as a revision strategy for ESL writers. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 126-139). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4. Cresswell, A. (2000). Self-monitoring in student writing. ELT Journal, 54, 235-244.
5. Cumming, A. (1989). Writing expertise and second-language proficiency. Language Learning, 39, 81-141.
6. Cumming, A. (1990). Metalinguistic and ideational thinking in second language composing. Written Communication, 7, 482-511.
7. De Guerrero, M. C. M., & Villamil, O. S. (1994). Social-cognitive dimensions of interaction in L2 peer revision. The Modern Language Journal, 78, 484-496.
8. Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2001). Preemptive focus on form in the ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 35, 407-432.
9. Ericsson, K., & Simon, H. (1987). Verbal reports on thinking. In G. Kasper (Ed.), Introspection in second language research (pp. 24-53). Avon, England: Multilingual Matters.
10. Ericsson, K., & Simon, H. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
11. Faigley, L., & Witte, S. (1981). Analyzing revision. College Composition and Communication, 32, 400-414.
12. Faigley, L., & Witte, S. (1984). Measuring the effects of revisions on text structure. In L. Bridwell (Ed.), New directions in composition research (pp. 95-108). New York: Guildford Press.
13. Fathman, A. K., & Whalley, E. (1990). Teacher response to student writing: Focus on form versus content. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 178-190). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
14. Ferris, D. (1995). Can advanced ESL students be taught to correct their most serious and frequent errors? CATESOL Journal, 8, 41-62.
15. Ferris, D. (1999). The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to Truscott (1996). Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 1-11.
16. Fitzgerald, J. (1987). Research on revision in writing. Review of Educational Research, 57, 481-506.
17. Flower, L., & Hayes, J. (1981a). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32, 365-387.
18. Flower, L., & Hayes, J. (1981b). Plans that guide the composing process. In J. F. Dominic (Ed.), Writing: The nature, development, and teaching of written communication (pp. 39-58). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
19. Garcia Mayo, M. P., & Pica, T. (2000). L2 learner interaction in a foreign language setting: Are learning needs addressed? International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 38, 35-58.
20. Gass, S. M., & Mackey, A. (2000). Stimulated recall methodology in second language research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
21. Gass, S. M., & Varonis, E. M. (1985). Task variation and nonnative/nonnative negotiation of meaning. In C G. Madden (Ed.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 149-161). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
22. Grant, L., & Ginther, A. (2000). Using computer-tagged linguistic features to describe L2 writing differences. Journal of Second Language Writing, 9, 123-145.
23. Hamp-Lyons, L. (1991). Reconstructing "academic writing proficiency." In L. HampLyons (Ed.), Assessing second language writing in academic contexts (pp. 127-153). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
24. Hamp-Lyons, L., & Henning, G. (1991). Communicative writing profiles: An investigation of the transferability of a multiple-trait scoring instrument across ESL writing assessment contexts. Language Learning, 41, 337-373.
25. Harklau, L. (2002). The role of writing in classroom second language acquisition. Journal of Second Language Writing, 11, 329-350.
26. Hayes, J. (1996). A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing. In C. M. L. S. Ransdell (Ed.), The science of writing. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
27. Hayes, J., Flower, L., Schriver, K., Stratman, J., & Carey, L. (1987). Cognitive processes in revision. In S. Rosenberg (Ed.), Advances in applied psycholinguistics: Reading writing and language learning (Vol. 2, pp. 176-240). New York: Cambridge University Press.
28. Hedgcock, J., & Lefkowitz, N. (1992). Collaborative oral/aural revision in foreign language writing instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1, 255-276.
29. Kellog, R. T. (1994). The psychology of writing. New York: Oxford University Press.
30. Lane, J., & Lange, E. (1993). Writing clearly: An editing guide. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
31. Lapkin, S., Swain, M., & Smith, M. (2002). Reformulation and the learning of French pronominal verbs in a Canadian French immersion context. The Modern Language Journal, 86, 485-507.
32. Lockhart, C., & Ng, P. (1995). Analyzing talk in ESL peer response groups: Stances, functions, and content. Language Learning, 45, 605-655.
33. Long, M. (1983). Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of comprehensible input. Applied Linguistics, 4, 126-141.
34. Lyster, R. (1998). Negotiation of form, recasts, and explicit correction in relation to error types and learner repair immersion classrooms. Language Learning, 20, 55-85.
35. Lyster, R. (2004). Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 399-432.
36. Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 37-66.
37. Mendonca, C. O., & Johnson, K. E. (1994). Peer review negotiations: Revision activities in ESL writing instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 745-769.
38. Nelson, G. L., & Murphy, J. M. (1992). An L2 writing group: Task and social dimensions. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1, 171-193.
39. Nelson, G. L., & Murphy, J. M. (1993). Peer response groups: Do L2 writers use peer comments in revising their drafts? TESOL Quarterly, 27, 135-141.
40. Pica, T. (1988). Interlanguage adjustments as an outcome of NNS-NNS negotiated interaction. Language Learning, 38, 45-73.
41. Pica, T. (1994). Research on negotiation: What does it reveal about second-language learning conditions, processes, and outcomes? Language Learning, 44, 493-527.
42. Polio, C., Fleck, C., & Leder, N. (1998). "If I only had more time": ESL learners' changes in linguistic accuracy on essay revisions. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7, 43-68.
43. Raimes, A. (2001). What unskilled ESL students do as they write: A classroom study of composing. In P. K., Matsuda & T. Silva (Eds.), Landmark essays on ESL writing (pp. 37-61). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
44. Sengupta, S. (2000). An investigation into the effects of revision strategy instruction on L2 secondary school learners. System, 28, 97-113.
45. Shehadeh, A. (2002). Comprehensible output, from occurrence to acquisition: An agenda for acquisitional research. Language Learning, 52, 597-647.
46. Suzuki, M. (2004). Repetition and second language writers' revision: A case study of two adult second language learners' self revision and peer revision. In E. Churchill, M. Kawate-Mierzejewska, J. Pielech, & T. Matikainen (Eds.), Temple University Japan Applied Linguistics Colloquium 2004 (pp. 231-240). Tokyo: Temple University, Japan.
47. Suzuki, M. (2006). Negotiation processes and text changes in Japanese learners' self-revisions and peer revisions of their written compositions in English. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
48. Swain, M. (1998). Focus on form through conscious reflection. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 64-81). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
49. Swain, M. (2005). The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 471-483). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
50. Swain, M. (2006). Verbal protocols: What does it mean for research to use speaking as a data collection tool? In P. Duff (Ed.), Inference and generalizability in applied linguistics: Multiple research perspectives (pp. 97-113). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
51. Swain, M., Brooks, L., & Tocalli-Beller, A. (2002). Peer-peer dialogue as a means of second language learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 171-185.
52. Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 16, 371-391.
53. Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. The Modern Language Journal, 83, 320-338.
54. Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2001). Focus on form through collaborative dialogue: Exploring task effects. In P. Skehan, M. Swain, & M. Bygate (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 99-118). Harlow, England: Pearson Education.
55. Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2002). Talking it through: Two French immersion learners' response to reformulation. International Journal of Educational Research, 37, 285-304.
56. Tocalli-Beller, A., & Swain, M. (2005). Reformulation: The cognitive conflict and L2 learning it generates. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 15, 5-28.
57. Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46, 327-369.
58. Van den Branden, K (1997). Effects of negotiation on language learners' output. Language Learning, 47, 589-636.
59. Villamil, O. S., & de Guerrero, M. C. M. (1998). Assessing the impact of peer revision on L2 writing. Applied Linguistics, 19, 491-514.
60. Whalen, K., & Menard, N. (1995). L1 and L2 writers' strategic and linguistic knowledge: A model of multiple-level discourse processing. Language Learning, 45, 381-418.
61. Williams, J. (1999). Learner-generated attention to form. Language Learning, 49, 583-625.
62. Williams, J. (2001a). The effectiveness of spontaneous attention to form. System, 29, 325-340.
63. Williams, J. (2001b). Learner-generated attention to form. Language Learning 51, 303-346.
64. Yagelski, R. (1995). The role of classroom context in the revision strategies of student writers. Research in the Teaching of English, 29, 216-238.