International students navigate complex translingual and multi-cultural situations to express their individual and diverse identities. As second language (L2) instructors, we equip students early in the language-acquisition process with statements of identity: “I’m Chinese. I’m a painter and an engineer. I’m a CU Buff.” We encourage students to express their individuality in class interactions and writings. We celebrate their diverse identities through on-campus cultural events. Yet, do we equip students to embrace their common identity, the university student?
Labeling facets of identity helps students express a sense of self and establish themselves within a given discourse community. More important than the linguistically-simple labels (e.g. “I am a university student”) are the complex “sociocultural practices” or “communities of practice” (Lave & Wenger, 1991) of students’ broader identity-based community, the university. ĚýLave and Wenger (1991) suggest for new members to achieve “full participation” in the university community requires “mastery” of these sociocultural practices.Ěý (p. 29). While all new university students must master the academic sociocultural practices, international students face the additional underlying hurdle of academic English.
Academic English and L2 skills have traditionally been taught through a focused-skill approach in which classes are divided into listening, speaking, reading, and writing, but students may run the risk of not transferring knowledge to the other domains. Students may be prepared to perfect their pronunciation for a listening-speaking final presentation but in the writing classroom do not apply their pronunciation knowledge when presenting their research paper. The lack of skills transfer worsens when international students participate in the university and professors assign papers without explicit language or writing instruction. Professors primarily use academic writing assignments to assess students’ knowledge, to promote students’ learning, and to encourage student scholars to join “disciplinary communities” throughout all courses (Coffin, et al. 2003, p. 2). However, faculty often assume writing to be a “common sense” skill (as cited in Coffin et al., 2003, p. 2) and fail to teach the nuances of both written and oral communication required for international students to join their fellow scholars.
L2 writing course instructors even assume, as do university professors, that their students are prepared to discuss readings and ideas in small and large group conversations. However, their assumptions can lead to significant communication challenges. For example, hedging and softening voices communicate uncertainty of an idea or need for help (Minett, 2009). Writing experts are even trained to listen and watch for the “interactional cues” to know when to offer answers whether it be a more appropriate word or phrasing for complex cognitive practices (Minett, 2009, p. 67). However, international students may hedge, avoid responding, or speak too quietly to be heard out of a lack of confidence in their academic English, not in their ideas. In a case-study of Chinese students’ perception of L2-proficiency and difficulties with English, many self-reported fear of accent being a reason to speak more quietly or apply additional avoidance tactics (Jiang, Yang, & Zhou, 2017, p. 71). These affective filters and face-saving tactics send mixed signals in the university community of practice resulting in students expressing lack of understanding or opinion while students are merely demonstrating insecurities about oral-English production.
Across the disciplines, the student is expected to have mastered the sociocultural expectations of scholarly communities of practice which include cognitive flexibility expressed through concrete linguistic forms. However, the tendency of preparatory classes to segregate skills means knowledge transfer is inconsistent. Speaking classes encourage quick responsiveness and self-correcting in the moment, while writing classes emphasize grammatical accuracy and cognitive stability (Hauoucha, 2012). ĚýIn the writing classroom, students struggle to communicate cognitive-fluctuations about their written ideas in spoken contexts including in brainstorming sessions, peer-review sessions, writing conferences with professors, and in-class presentations. In order for students to achieve full communicative competence about a topic and participation in a community of practice, they must be able to not only write about their thoughts and opinions, but they must also must be able to orally communicate about them, especially at varying cognitive stages of the idea formation.
Thus, a more holistic, integrated-skills philosophy of language skill development offers a more effective method for students to develop this communicative competence while in the writing classroom. Oxford (2001) suggests that “authentic communication” is best achieved when “skills are interwoven during instruction.” This approach emphasizes for students the importance of language development not purely to pass a class but rather to participate in “real means of interaction” (Oxford, 2001) as university scholars. Ěý
The şů«ÍŢĘÓƵ’s L2-writing courses offered in both the International English Center (IEC) and the Program for Writing & Rhetoric (PWR) are commonly viewed and taught with a single-skill focus. Despite single-skill course offerings, the TESOL field’s emphasis on communicative competence encourages instructors to integrate all language skills into the classroom to best prepare their students; however, with rising demands from University standards and ever-developing methodologies, IEC and PWR L2-writing instructors often find there is too much to teach and find very little time to support the development of students’ oral communication skills in addition to their writing. A simple solution to this challenge is incorporating the direct instruction of pronunciation into the writing classroom – a term which will subsequently be referred to as pronunciation for writing purposes (PWP).
PWP, a concrete and simple method, implements a skill-integration approach to the already-established writing processes bringing communicative competence to the forefront of an academic L2-writing class. International students face high communicative demands when speaking about written ideas at various stages of the composition process. This process requires them to use unique critical-thinking skills and language competencies in their second languages. Discussing idea development requires subtle analysis of communicative cues, including direct versus rhetorical questions, hesitancy and hedging, and reporting on jargon-heavy research, but because of “skills-focused” class structures, students are not explicitly taught to discuss writing in flexible, oral-driven ways. In other words, speaking tasks are left for the speaking and pronunciation sections; writing assignments are submitted as stagnate, finished products. However, using explicit pronunciation instruction in a writing class tightens transferability of important linguistic and cultural skills; it equips students to express their forming ideas and opinions while developing their identities as full participatory members of university communities.
Writing instructors can easily integrate pronunciation instruction into their writing classes by providing mini-lessons in L2-academic writing courses on pronunciation points such as question intonation, word stress, and phonemes which are then practiced at various stages of the writing process. Table A provides a rationale for and description of appropriate contexts in which instructors can integrate PWP into their classes.
|
Pronunciation Point |
Teaching Pronunciation in a Writing Classroom |
|
Question Intonation |
When? Before their participation in group discussions, peer review sessions, conferencing about writing papers, interviewing, or office hour visits with professors, teach students rising and falling question intonation. How? Provide students with a list of context-dependent questions that they practice and receive feedback on. Discuss direct vs. indirect questions commonly associated with the writing process. Example: Explain differences in rising and falling intonation in “This is your thesis?” versus “This is your thesis.”Ěý The former asks for a direct response from the student author while the latter confirms the reader’s understanding of the writing project. Why? Many classes on campus depend on small/large-group discussions and workshop sessions where students must ask questions of each other and peer-review their work. Strong feedback in both settings demands curiosity and negotiation of ideas expressed through questions. Students may miss shifts in topics or requests for information that halt discussions. |
|
Word Stress and Problematic Consonants and Vowels |
When? During topic selection and before a final presentation about the topic teach students how to identify and produce the correct word stress and pronunciation of problematic consonants and vowels. How? Have students practice identifying and using common academic vocabulary or jargon-specific vocabulary used to discuss their academic papers. Example: Instruct students in the pronunciation of common but challenging words such as thesis, rhetoric, or genre. Why? The most challenging words to pronounce on a topic are often the academic or field-specific multisyllabic words, yet these are also the most important key terms necessary for students to effectively communicate about their topics. |
|
Intonation, Pausing, and Prominence |
When? Teach students common intonation, prominence, and pausing patterns as they are brainstorming with their peers, conferencing papers with their instructors, interviewing others about their paper topics, or discussing their ideas in groups. How? Have students find and identify the significance and use of pausing, intonation, and prominence to express opinion, hedging, emphasis, interruption, constructive criticism, and hesitancy. Example: Teach the meaning difference between “What do YOU think about this?” compared to “What do you think about THIS?” when “you” is emphasized or “this” is emphasized. Why? As students develop and present their fluctuating ideas, there are cues used to express 1) lost train of thought, 2) lack of knowledge of a word, 3) confusion or 4) self-monitoring/correcting a previous statement. Mixing these cues may leave peers confused or impatient. It may also leave L2 speakers unsure about the communication practices and demands being requested (e.g. if they do not recognize a direct question is being posed because WH-syntax is dropped and only rising intonation present). |
|
Reductions |
When? Before conferences with instructors or before working with partners, teach students speech reductions How? Teach common expressions they might use in instructor-to-students or student-to-student interactions. Example: Expose students to sentences such as “You’re gonna wanna use more examples” and analyze the nuances of reduction patterns. Why? Reductions increase fluency (speed and accuracy of oral communication) but can also be difficult to identify and respond appropriately to, especially in higher-stakes contexts like student-instructor conferences. Many international students avoid asking instructors for clarification on paper feedback (written or oral) due to embarrassment or cultural differences. ĚýExplicitly teaching students the common reductions in English not only increases their listening comprehension, but also allows them to confidently ask clarifying questions realizing that reductions often confuse even native speakers. Students can use knowledge of reductions and clarifying questions to become part of the community practice. |
Ěý
PWP teaches students to effectively articulate their written ideas in university interactions, including the writing classroom, professor and student interaction, peer-review sessions, and class presentations. This concrete teaching method naturally integrates skills and increases knowledge transfer across domains without losing focus on the given skill. It gives L2 writing teachers simple yet effective means of introducing students to the community of academic writers. Ideally, through this practice, students develop the ability to:
- participate in the academic-writing community as equals; PWP allows them to communicate clearly and be perceived as equal contributors in this community of practice rather than being perceived as less capable than their native speaker peers because of a lack of language competence.
- practice articulating their developing thoughts; direct pronunciation instruction allows students to more confidently communicate what they are thinking about in their L1 while recognizing the ever-changing cognitive formation of an idea.
- observe and practice the nuances and complexities of communication and negotiation of meaning with ideas in development; this method strengthens students’ listening comprehension and teaches students metacognitive questions to pose regarding discourse patterns.
Through PWP, our international students begin to actively engage as academics at CU by applying their pronunciation skills to the writing process and other university interactions. Students are equipped to not only express their identities with the linguistic label of “university students” but also fully participate as diverse members in the community of practice as Buffs.
Ěý
References
Coffin, C., Curry, M.J., Goodman, S., Hewings, A., Lillis, T.M., & Swann, J. (2003). Teaching Academic Writing: A toolkit for higher education. New York: Routledge
Haoucha, M. (2012). The role of peer feedback, teacher written and taped. International Journal of Arts & Sciences, 5(5), 73-108. Retrieved from
Jiang, X., Yang, X., & Zhou, Y. (2017). Chinese international students’ perceptions of their language issues in U.S. universities: A comparative study. Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies in Education, 6(1), 63. Retrieved from
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Minett, A. J. (2009). Earth aches by midnight: helping ESL writers clarify their intended meaning. ESL Writers: A guide for writing center tutors. 2nd ed. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers, Inc.
Oxford, R (2001). Integrated skills in the ESL/EFL classroom. Eric Digest. Retrieved from .
Ěý