This paper addresses an issue of interest to many first- (L1) and second-language (L2) writing theorists and teachers: the role(s) that computer-mediated communication (CMC) can play in making writing instruction more effective and more meaningful, particularly in the highly technological early years of the twenty-first century. This paper explores the use of CMC in the form of a writing course listserv on which L2 students and the author of an assigned novel interacted in an effort to strengthen students’ reading of and writing about the novel. Examples of the interaction between the novel’s author and the students are presented and analyzed relative to the ways in which this interaction was intended to help students asynchronously construct understanding that could then inform their writing about the literary text.

Since the early 1980s, second language (L2) writing specialists have been examining possible roles for computers in L2 writing instruction. How, and to what extent, L2 students use computer for academic literacy purposes beyond the writing classroom, that is, across the curriculum, has not received much attention. Because a common goal of L2 college level writing courses is to prepare students to write in these other domains, an awareness of computer-based literacy activities in non-L2 writing courses is essential to the cause of helping L2 writing instructors connect what students learn in their courses to how they write (and read) in other courses. This paper describes research aimed at contributing to such awareness: a qualitative study of the computer-based reading and writing activity of two undergraduate English as a Second Language (ESL) students beyond ESL writing courses.

This article looks at the use of computer-mediated communication in an ESL teacher education course. A course listserv was established so as to facilitate increased interaction between students on the premise that community building and student collaboration in the construction of knowledge and understanding play important roles in the training of language teachers. The article explores how opportunities for professional growth were enhanced through a process of electronically negotiated understanding as students shared topics of interest and posted comments on those topics.

In recent years, there has been growing interest in the use of corpora in L2 writing instruction. Many studies have argued for corpus use from a teacher’s perspective, that is, in terms of how teachers can develop instructional materials and activities involving a corpus-based orientation. In contrast, relatively little attention has been paid to investigations of learners’ actual use of corpora and their attitudes toward such use in the L2 writing classroom. This paper describes a study of corpus use in two ESL academic writing courses. Specifically, the study examined students’ corpus use behavior and their perceptions of the strengths and weaknesses of corpora as a second language writing tool. The study’s qualitative and quantitative data indicate that, overall, the students perceived the corpus approach as beneficial to the development of L2 writing skill and increased confidence toward L2 writing.

Compositionists often speak of the need to help students acquire a voice or identity in their writing. This interest in teaching voice is understandable but also problematic. Satisfactorily defining “voice,” especially from a second language (L2) point of view, is one of those problems. Another is a reliance on various conceptualizations that privilege a “Western” or a romantic or individualistic notion of voice in classroom situations where many students do not share such a background. In this paper, we use three case studies to address a third problem: a tendency in L2 writing instruction and research to overlook the voices, or identities, already possessed by L2 writers, many of whom at the graduate level bring a history of success as professional/academic writers in their native language and culture to the L2 writing classroom. We examine the role voice can play not as a teaching device but rather as a means by which to investigate and understand the voice-related issues these mature writers encounter in L2 contexts.

The role of literature in the composition classroom has long been controversial. In this article, we examine the arguments both for and against the use of literature by, first, surveying the main stances taken in L1 composition pedagogical theory, which predate and have significantly influenced L2 composition, and then by reviewing L2 compositionists' own perspectives on literature. The L2 arguments can be seen as resonating, but at the same time, diverging from those of L1 writing theory. Yet, all can be interpreted as responses to by now familiar themes in both L2 and L1 compositions, such as process versus product, academic discourse community initiation versus preparation for life, and hegemony of the established elite versus empowerment of the less privileged. Our goal in this review of the long-standing debate is not to encourage polarization for or against literature, but rather to provide, through the varied perspectives presented, a basis for informed decisions about the possible value of literature in particular contexts in which teachers and their students find themselves.

Several L2 literacy specialists, for example, Flowerdew [Flowerdew, J. (1999). Problems in writing for scholarly publication in English: The case of Hong Kong. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 243–264], has pointed out that L2 writers may consciously avoid adopting qualitative research methods, undoubtedly because of the challenges that such a self-reflexive, rhetorically complex, and generically unstable research report mode poses. Those who advise L2 graduate students may wonder if these students should be discouraged from using qualitative methods. The goal of this qualitative study was to determine what initially motivates L2 doctoral dissertation writers to adopt a qualitative approach and what sustains their commitment to it. Both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation orientations were found in the self reports of these successful L2 qualitative dissertation writers, as were strong philosophical commitment to their research paradigm and intense intellectual curiosity about their topics. Some students, however, were more research paradigm-driven, while others were more topic-driven, but none perceived their status as L2 users as an insurmountable obstacle to success as qualitative dissertation writers.

Portfolios have attracted considerable interest among ESL writing and assessment specialists since the 1980s. Whether they have fulfilled the promise their proponents envision is a question still under investigation. This paper describes two case studies which looked at student experiences with portfolios in two ESL writing courses where the portfolio pedagogies employed differed, so that each student was able to experience portfolios under meaningful conditions for comparison. The results showed that the participants liked the idea of portfolios but did not strongly endorse their use as employed in the courses which served as the research settings. The study’s findings shed light on how students respond to different portfolio models and thus contribute to our understanding of the place portfolios can occupy in L2 writing instruction.

In the 1990s, there has been an emerging interest among L2 compositionists, especially those operating in an EAP/ESP context, in the needs of “a relatively understudied but growing group: NNS graduate students” (Casanave & Hubbard 1992). These students face the often daunting task of learning how to read and write effectively within a specific discourse community whose expectations and practices may well seem difficult to identify, let alone control as L2 academic writers. Helping these NNS writers function successfully within their chosen discourse communities involves, among other tasks, finding ways of sensitizing them to the demands and tendencies of those communities. This paper discusses the contributions portfolios can make within a discourse community awareness framework through a “disciplinary portfolio” pedagogy. The paper outlines the case for such a pedagogy and describes a teaching situation in which the disciplinary portfolio has been employed.

Punctuation is a surprisingly underexplored area of second language writing and learning. The small body of published literature about punctuation tends to look at ways in which punctuation can be taught. Little is known, except anecdotally, about how English as a second language (ESL) students actually feel about using English punctuation, despite the fact that they must use it frequently if they are writing in English, and may have different notions of how it functions based on its use in their native language. In this paper we report on a survey study of university students’ attitudes toward punctuation in English as a first step toward generating deeper understanding about students’ use of punctuation. The results suggest that students are generally somewhat positive about their use of English punctuation, with some variance in their use of punctuation depending on the writing context at hand.