آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 24 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 849 |
| تعداد مقالات | 7,542 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 13,297,668 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 11,527,474 |
A Probe into Adaptive Transfer across Writing Contexts: A Case of an EGAP Class | ||
| Teaching English as a Second Language Quarterly (Formerly Journal of Teaching Language Skills) | ||
| مقاله 6، دوره 33، شماره 1، مرداد 2014، صفحه 113-133 اصل مقاله (127.64 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: Research Paper | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22099/jtls.2014.2024 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| Gholam Reza Zarei1؛ Ahmad Alibabaee* 2 | ||
| 1Isfahan University of Technology | ||
| 2Sheikhbahaee University | ||
| چکیده | ||
| In an effort to expand the disciplinary discussions on transfer in L2 writing and because most studies have focused on transfer as reuse and not as an adequate adaptation of writing knowledge in new contexts, the present study as the first of its kind aimed to explore the issue of adaptive transfer in an English for General Academic Purposes (EGAP) writing course. The study thus focused on types of adaptive transfer across disciplines and the processes involved in achieving them. The data were collected through interviews conducted on writing samples both from the participants' EGAP class and their other courses in the university (non EGAP). The results showed five categories of adaptive transfer including 'organizing, grammar refining, rephrasing, metaphorizing, and resource using'. Also, the analysis of the data demonstrated a variety of processes involved in the accomplishment of adaptive transfer, which all pointed to the multidimensionality of evaluation and re-evaluation that the writers conducted to achieve their composing potential. Additionally, the results revealed slight disciplinary inconsistency for the categories of adaptive transfer detected, with the English Language enjoying the highest and Electrical Engineering the lowest frequency of such transfer. The results imply that EGAP classes can create a directive condition for the enhancement of learning transfer. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| Adaptive transfer؛ learning transfer؛ L2 Writing؛ Transfer type؛ Transfer process | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Axelrod, R. B., & Cooper, C. R. (2004). The St. Martin’s guide to writing (7th ed.). Boston, MA: St Martin’s. Beech, K. (1999). Consequential transitions: A sociocultural expedition beyond transfer in education. Review of Research in Education, 24, 101–139. Bradford, J. D., & Schwartz, D. L. (1999). Rethinking transfer: A simple proposal with multiple implications. Review of Research in Education, 24, 61–100. Broudy, H. S. (1977). Types of knowledge and purposes of education. In R. C. Anderson, R. J. Spiro, & W. E. Montague (Eds.). Schooling and the acquisition of knowledge (pp. 1–17). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Canagarajah, A. S. (2006b). Toward a writing pedagogy of shuttling between languages: Learning from multilingual writers. College English, 68, 589–604. Carroll, L. A. (2002). Rehearsing new roles: How college students develop as writers. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press. DePalma, M.J. & Ringer, J. M. (2011). Toward a theory of adaptive transfer: Expanding disciplinary discussions of ‘‘transfer’’ in second-language writing and composition studies. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20, 134–147. Detterman, D. K. (1993). The case for the prosecution: Transfer as an epiphenomenon. In D. K. Detterman&R. J. Sternberg (Eds.). Transfer on trial: Intelligence, cognition, and instruction (pp. 1–24). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation. Foxon, M. (1994). Action planning to facilitate the transfer of training. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 10(1), 1–18. Hansen, J. G. (2000). Interactional conflicts among audience, purpose, and content knowledge in the acquisition of academic literacy in an EAP course. Written Communication, 17, 27–52. Haskell, R. E. (2001). Transfer of learning: Cognition, instruction, and reasoning. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, Incorporated. Leki, I., & Carson, J. G. (1994). Students’ perceptions of EAP writing instruction and writing needs across the disciplines. TESOL Quarterly, 28(1), 81–101. Lobato, J. (2003). How design experiments can inform a rethinking of transfer and vice versa. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 17–20. Matsuda, P. (1997). Contrastive rhetoric in context: A dynamic model of L2 writing. In T. Silva & P. Matsuda (Eds.). Landmark essays on second language writing (pp. 241–255). Mahwah: Erlbaum. Perkins, D. N., & Salomon, G. (1994). Transfer of learning. In Husen, T., & Postlethwaite, T. N. Eds. The international encyclopedia of education. Vol. 11 (pp. 6452–6457). Oxford, UK: Pergamon. Royer, J. M., Mestre, J. P., & Dufresne, R. J. (2005). Framing the transfer problem. In J. P. Mestre (Ed.). Transfer of learning from a modern multidisciplinary perspective (pp. vii–xxvi). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing. Smit, D. W. (2004). The end of composition studies. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press. Wardle, E. (2007). Understanding ‘‘transfer’’ from FYC: Preliminary results of a longitudinal study. Writing Program Administration, 31, 65–85. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. New York: Cambridge University Press. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 2,667 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 1,873 |
||