Rationale

Radicalizing Traditional Writing Classroom Practices 

This book is designed to incorporate communication into the L2 academic writing classroom, whether for English as a second language or other languages. Teaching writing is often considered challenging due to the heavy workload associated with lecturing and grading (Patwary, 2023). Experienced writing teachers benefit from established practices, which can alleviate some of the struggles related to class preparation and lecturing. However, relying too heavily on familiar methods may hinder the integration of new practices.

​

Conversely, new writing instructors may feel overwhelmed by the substantial workload required in a writing course (Mittan, 1989, as cited in Ferris & Hedgcock, 2005). Planning lectures, creating materials, or adapting lessons to incorporate textbooks, alongside marking essays and providing feedback, leaves little time for innovation.

​

In addition, teaching writing faces a silent obstacle: most tasks in writing courses can be described as quiet, solitary activities (Liu & Hansen, 2002). This isolation affects both students and teachers and can lead to a lack of communication among students. As a result, students may struggle to articulate questions about their writing, as they are not trained to discuss the writing process (Lee, 2016).

​

While the primary goal of an L2 writing class is to cultivate students’ academic writing skills, it is essential to include practices that develop their overall language proficiency. Writing classes naturally integrate reading, as sources are a key part of the writing process. Listening practice may occur during lectures, but speaking often lacks an obvious role in writing instruction.

One widely used approach to incorporating communication in writing classes is peer review (Patwary, 2023), though it can feel outdated in its traditional form. A common peer review activity involves students marking each other’s papers using a checklist based on the project rubric. In theory, students should discuss their suggested edits with their partners (van den Berg et al., 2006). However, students unfamiliar with discussing their writing often find the speaking component challenging, leading to silence.

​

Extensive literature (Hislop & Stracke, 2017; Hyland & Hyland, 2006; Liu & Hansen, 2002; Patwary, 2023) highlights the benefits of peer feedback and students’ positive perceptions of it in ESL writing classrooms. However, there remains a significant gap in research and practice exploring innovative ways to incorporate communication into the well-established practice of peer feedback.

​

With these considerations in mind, this book aims to equip writing instructors with innovative peer review practices and tools to create communicative writing classrooms. It addresses the following topics:

​

• Current attitudes of teachers and students toward peer review

• Norming students for peer review practices

• The role of communicative activities in writing instruction

This book seeks to spotlight instructors who are breaking the mold. Each chapter describes a classroom practice that introduces new ways to integrate communication or reimagines peer review in L2 academic writing classrooms.

​

References

Ferris, D., & Hedgcock, J. S. (2005). Teaching ESL composition: Purpose, process, and practice. Lawrence Erlbaum Association, Inc.

Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback on second language students' writing. Language teaching, 39(2), 83–101. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444806003399

Lee, I. (2016, May). Putting Students at the Centre of Classroom L2 Writing Assessment. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 72(2), 258-280. https://doi.10.3138/cmlr.2802

Liu, J., & Hansen, J. G. (2002). Peer response in second language writing classrooms. University of Michigan Press.

Patwary, M. N. (2023). Peer Feedback in Developing Writing in Tertiary EFL/ESL Education: A Review of Related Research. Crossings: A Journal of English Studies, 14, 154–166. https://doi.org/10.59817/cjes.v14i.489

Van den Berg, I., Admiraal, W., & Pilot, A. (2006). Peer assessment in university teaching: evaluating seven course designs. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(1), 19–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930500262346