Topic familiarity and story continuation in young English as a foreign language learners’ writing tasks

Main Article Content

Gavin Bui
Xueya Luo

Abstract

Prior research demonstrates that primary and secondary school teachers often find teaching young learners to write in a second language a slow and effortful process. Moreover, students in this age range lack the motivation to write. Therefore, it is important to explore the EFL writing pedagogy suitable for young learners. The present study investigated how story continuation (with or without reading input) under different topic familiarity conditions serves as a viable pedagogical means for secondary school students. Ninety-one Chinese students in four intact classes of comparable proficiency levels were assigned four writing task conditions in a 2 ⨉ 2 factorial design. Group 1 (Fam) was provided with the beginning of a familiar story in L1 Chinese and was required to complete the story in L2 English. Group 2 (UnFam) had the same task as Group 1, with an unfamiliar story. Group 3 (Fam+Input) was initially provided with the complete familiar story in Chinese (the same story as Group 1) as reading input and were then instructed to write the story in English with the reading material taken away. Group 4 (Unfam+Input) received the full unfamiliar story in Chinese (the same story as Group 2) as input before writing. Again they were not allowed to refer to the reading in the composing process. The results revealed that the young learners who wrote on familiar topics (Groups 1 and 3) produced longer texts and demonstrated greater lexical diversity than those with unfamiliar stories (Groups 2 and 4), although topic familiarity did not affect their writing quality or lexical sophistication. As for the story continuation conditions, students who completed writing the story without the L1 reading input on the topics (Groups 1 and 2) developed longer compositions and better writing quality than those with such input (Groups 3 and 4), although their lexical profiles (both lexical diversity and lexical sophistication) remained uninfluenced. Pedagogical implications for EFL writing among young learners were also discussed in the present study.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Bui, G., & Luo, X. (2021). Topic familiarity and story continuation in young English as a foreign language learners’ writing tasks. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 11(3), 377-400. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2021.11.3.4
Section
Articles
Author Biographies

Gavin Bui, The Hang Seng University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China

Gavin Bui, PhD, is Associate Professor of Applied Linguistics at the Hang Seng University of Hong Kong. His research interests include task-based language teaching and third language learning motivation. His recent publications appeared in Language Teaching Research (2018), International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (2019), System (2019), and Applied Linguistics Review (2020). He is Co-editor of Asian Journal of English Language Teaching.

Contact details: Department of English, The Hang Seng University of Hong Kong, Siu Lek Yuen, Shatin, New Territories, M422A, Hong Kong (gavinbui@hsu.edu.hk)

Xueya Luo, Gaoxin Middle School of Shenzhen Nanshan Foreign Language School (Group), Shenzhen, China

Xueya Luo holds an MA in translation and interpreting studies from the Polytechnic University of Hong Kong. She is a teacher of English as a foreign language at the Shenzhen Nanshan Foreign Language School Group GaoXin Junior High School, Guangdong, China.

Contact details: Shenzhen Nanshan Foreign Language School Group GaoXin Junior High School, 5 Gaoxin Ring Road South, Nanshan District, Shenzhen, Guangdong, P. R. China (67445021@qq.com)

References

  1. Becker, A. (2006). A review of writing model research based on cognitive processes. In A. Horning & A. Becker (Eds.), Revision: History, theory, and practice (pp. 25-49). Parlor.
  2. Braine, G., & May, C. (1995). Writing from sources: A guide for ESL students. Mayfield Pub. Co.
  3. Bei, X. (2009). The effects of writing task repetition and teacher feedback on writing quality and fluency among students of different proficiency levels. Modern Foreign Languages, 32(4), 389-398. http://xdwy.cbpt.cnki.net/WKD/WebPublication/paperDigest.aspx?paperID=652ca93b-6e7e-4539-a74f-0fabaefbccc0
  4. Bui, G. (2014). Task readiness: Theoretical framework and empirical evidence from topic familiarity, strategic planning, and proficiency levels. In Skehan, P. (Ed.), Processing perspectives on task performance (pp. 63-94). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.5.03gav
  5. Bui, G. (2019). Influence of learners’ prior knowledge, L2 proficiency and pre-task planning time on L2 lexical complexity. IRAL – International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2018-0244
  6. Bui, G., & Teng, F. (2021). Exploring complexity in L2 and L3 motivational systems: A dynamic systems theory perspective. The Language Learning Journal, 49(3), 302-317. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2019.1610032
  7. Bui, G., & Yu, R. (2019). Spaced multi-draft composing and feedback in mainland Chinese English as a foreign language secondary school writing literacy. In B. Reynolds & M. F. Teng (Eds.), English literacy instruction for Chinese speakers. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-6653-6_8
  8. Bügel, K., & Buunk, B. (1996). Sex differences in foreign language text comprehension: The role of interests and prior knowledge. Modern Language Journal, 80, 15-31. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1996.tb01133.x
  9. Chang, C. (2006). Effects of topic familiarity and linguistic difficulty on the reading strategies and mental representations of non-native readers of Chinese. Journal of Language and Learning, 4, 172-198.
  10. Chen, Q., & Donin, J. (1997). Discourse processing of first and second language biology texts: Effects of language proficiency and domain-specific knowledge. Modern Language Journal, 81, 209-227. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1997.tb01176.x
  11. Copland, F., Garton, S., & Burns, A. (2014). Challenges in teaching English to young learners: Global perspectives and local realities. TESOL Quarterly, 48(4), 738-762. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.148
  12. Eckstein, G., Chariton, J., & McCollum, R. M. (2011). Multi-draft composing: An iterative model for academic argument writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10, 162-172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2011.05.004
  13. Graham, S., & Hebert, M. A. (2010). Writing to read: Evidence for how writing can improve reading: A Carnegie corporation time to act report. Alliance for Excellent Education.
  14. Kellogg, R. T. (1996). A model of working memory in writing. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences and applications (pp. 57-71). Lawrence Erlbaum.
  15. Kellogg, R. T. (2001). Competition for working memory among writing processes. American Journal of Psychology, 114(2), 175-192. https://doi.org/10.2307/1423513
  16. Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction–integration model. Psychological Review, 95(2), 163-182.
  17. Kupers, E., Lehman-Wermser, A., McPherson, G., & Geert P. V. (2019). Children’s creativity: A theoretical framework and systematic review. Review of Educational Research, 89: 93-124. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654318815707
  18. Lee, S. K. (2007). Effects of textual enhancement and topic familiarity on Korean EFL students reading comprehension and learning of passive form. Language Learning, 57, 87-118. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2007.00400.x
  19. Lee, I., Yu, S., & Liu, Y. (2018). Hong Kong secondary students’ motivation in EFL writing: A survey study. TESOL Quarterly, 52(1), 176-187. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.364
  20. Leeser, M. J. (2007). Learner-based factors in L2 reading comprehension and processing grammatical form: Topic familiarity and working memory. Language Learning, 57(2), 229-270. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2007.00408.x
  21. Long, D. R. (1990). What you don’t know can’t help you: An exploratory study of background knowledge and second language listening comprehension. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 65-80. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100008743
  22. Man, L., Bui, G., & Teng, F. (2018). From second language to third language learning: Exploring a dual-motivation system among multilinguals. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 41(1), 61-90. https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.17051.man
  23. Markham, P., & Latham, M. (1987). The influence of religious-specific background knowledge on the listening comprehension of adult second-language students. Language Learning, 37, 157-170. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1987.tb00563.x
  24. Meara, P., & Bell, H. (2001). P-Lex: A simple and effective way of describing the lexical characteristics of short L2 tests. Prospect, 16(3), 5-19. http://www.ameprc.mq.edu.au/resources/prospect/V16_N3_2001
  25. Pallant, J. (2013). SPSS survival manual (5th ed.). Open University Press.
  26. Peng, J., Wang, C., & Lu, X. (2020). Effect of the linguistic complexity of the input text on alignment, writing fluency, and writing accuracy in the continuation task. Language Teaching Research, 24(3), 364-381. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1362168818783341
  27. Pickering, M. J., & S. Garrod. (2004). Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27(2), 169-190. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X04000056
  28. Qiu. X. (2020). Functions of oral monologic tasks: Effects of topic familiarity on L2 speaking performance. Language Teaching Research, 24(6), 745-764. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168819829021
  29. Qiu, X., & Lo, Y. Y. (2017). The influence of topic familiarity on L2 learners’ engagement in task performance and affective dispositions. Language Teaching Research, 21(6), 681-698.
  30. Schmidt-Rinehart, B. C. (1994). The effects of topic familiarity on second language listening comprehension. Modern Language Journal, 78, 179-189. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1994.tb02030.x
  31. Skehan, P. (2009). Lexical performance by native and non-native speakers on language learning tasks. In B. Richards, H. Daller, D. Malvern, P. Meara, J. Milton, & J. Treffers-Daller (Eds.), Vocabulary studies in first and second language acquisition: The interface between theory and application (pp. 107-124). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230242258_7
  32. Skehan, P., Bei, X., Li, Q., & Wang, Z. (2012). The task is not enough: Processing approaches to task-based performance. Language Teaching Research, 16(2), 170-187. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168811428414
  33. Stevens, R. J., Van Meter, P., & Warcholak, N. D. (2010). The effects of explicitly teaching story structure to primary grade children. The Journal of Literacy Research, 42(2),159-198. https://doi.org/10.1080/10862961003796173
  34. Tedick, D. J. (1990). ESL writing assessment: Subject-matter knowledge and its impact on performance. English for Specific Purposes, 9, 123-143. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-4906(90)90003-U
  35. Wang, C., & Wang, M. (2015). Effect of alignment on L2 written production. Applied Linguistics, 36(5), 503-526. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt051
  36. Wilson, K., & Korn, J. H. (2007). Attention during lectures: Beyond ten minutes. Teaching of Psychology, 34(2), 85-89.
  37. Zhang, X. (2017). Reading–writing integrated tasks, comprehensive corrective feedback, and EFL writing development. Language Teaching Research, 21(2), 217-240. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168815623291