ENTREVISTA DIRIGIDA AL RECTOR DEL COLEGIO “PABLO HANNÍBAL VELA”

The results of the integrated wring task scores confirm previous studies that have highlighted improvements in writing ability that can be gained from attending a pre-sessional EAP courses (Elder & O’Loughlin, 2003; Green, 2007; Terraschke & Wahid, 2011). The current research expands on the literature by showing that increases in writing ability can occur in a short period of intense instruction. The studies by Elder and O’Loughlin (2003) and Green (2007) were conducted on courses of 12 and 8 weeks, respectively, and therefore the current study may suggest that it is not necessary to provide EAP courses over extended periods as shorter courses can result in

significant increases in overall writing performance (d = 1.42). The impact of short and intensive EAP course was also confirmed by Mazgutova and Kormos’ (2015) study, who found improvements in measures of lexical and syntactical structures over a four-week EAP course.

The current study further adds to the literature on student adjustment that highlights that international students often go through a process of academic adjustment (Major, 2005; Quan et al., 2016). In the typical adjustment process students often have initial difficulties in adjusting to the differences in

academic styles between their home and destination environments, but over time adapt and can perform better academically. In Quan et al.’s (2016) model of adjustment, the process of academic adaptation typically takes one

semester of study, whereas in the current research the participants on the whole were able to perform better in their writing in a period of less than one month. This further highlights the significance of EAP courses as intensive pre-sessional programmes can act as a catalyst for student’s academic

136

development as they specifically focus on developing writing skills, whereas the focus of degree programmes is on teaching content and therefore may not support international students’ academic writing skills development

adequately.

Looking at the specific academic adjustment trajectories of the participants in the current research, a rudimentary model of adjustment is posited that

describes the academic development of international students over the current pre-sessional EAP course (Figure 7.1).

Figure 7.1: Model of pre-sessional EAP students’ academic writing adjustment

Stage 1 of the pre-sessional EAP adjustment model occurs prior to arrival and in the initial days of the course, prior to working on the first written assignment. While previous models of adjustment (e.g. Major, 2005; Quan et al., 2016) provide only one category of student at the initial stage, in the current model two distinct groups of students were found – those who are confident in their L2 academic writing ability and those who are not. Both undergraduate and postgraduate students may begin a pre-sessional course with limited

confidence in their L2 academic writing ability. For the undergraduate students (Bo, Jie), as their previous education was in high school, they were not

introduced to the academic writing genre and their experience of writing in English was limited to IELTS style argumentative essays that followed a rigid structure and a dependence on formulaic phrases. Most of the postgraduate students also mentioned that they had limited experience of academic writing in English (Hao, Lian, Yi) and they were unsure of the demands of writing in an English university. The other category of student at Stage 1 showed more

137

confidence in their writing ability at the initial stages of the EAP course. Xuan mentioned that his previous experience as a translation student gave him confidence in his ability write essays and that he could transfer his skills to L2 English academic writing. The results of the study in relation to initial

confidence in writing abilities mirrors the findings of Yang and Shi (2003) who highlighted the importance of educational background on students’ confidence in their L2 English academic writing. It is therefore important for EAP tutors to know the previous educational experience of their students as this will give an indication of the various levels of support that students may require throughout the course, and especially at the initial stages where students may have

limited confidence or knowledge of writing in L2 English.

Stage 2 of the model occurred around the time of the first written assignment in which all the students realised that there was dissonance between their current knowledge and the knowledge that was required for writing at tertiary level in the UK. Students at this stage reported that they had limited

vocabulary, were unsure of how to structure paragraphs and build arguments, and all the participants mentioned the differences between writing conventions in China and the UK. Xuan, who was initially confident in his academic writing abilities, mentioned that his confidence was decreased when he found that there were many differences between the writing he had previously done and the new style of writing that he was introduced to in preparation for the first assignment. Due to the adjustment issues that are encountered at Stage 2, EAP students may write their initial assignments using a knowledge telling model (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1987) in which they write by solely relying on prior information they have on a previous topic without referring to sources and not addressing the question fully. Evidence for this was found in the interview data as at T1 a number of students mentioned that they wrote the essays without planning and used the sources as a means of supplementing their ideas. This was especially true for the students who mentioned that they had recently had training in IELTS writing. Some students at Stage 2 also mentioned that they had difficulties in writing related to limited vocabulary knowledge. Students at the initial stages of writing in L2 English may therefore focus their cognitive processes on the translation phase (Flower and Hayes, 1981). By focusing so much attention on translating vocabulary and grammar, L2 writers may not adequately use other key cognitive writing process such planning and revising (Roca de Larios et al., 2008).

At Stage 3, after feedback on the initial assignment, further writing practice, and input on writing, the students started to adapt to the demands of L2 academic writing. Similar to the developments found by Terraschke and Wahid (2011), the students mentioned improving in writing and reading skills and in vocabulary, acquiring strategies for dealing with unknown vocabulary, and were generally able to verbalise the knowledge and skills that they had

138

been taught and had acquired. The students at this stage tried to overcome their initial lack of knowledge by doing extra supplementary work outside the classroom to improve their skills. An explanation for the students’ efforts in improving their abilities in their out of class time may be explained by Jin and Cortazzi’s (2006) model of Confucian learning in which students are said dedicate continuous effort to their studies through “studying extensively and practicing earnestly” (p. 13).

Looking further at Jin and Cortazzi’s (2006) model of learning in Confucian cultures it is apparent that the typical learning culture of Confucian heritage countries is conducive in a number of ways to the genre approach used in the research context. For example, in genre-based pedagogy teaching is explicit and teacher led with a priority given to learning from sample texts (Hyland, 2018). The genre style of teaching and learning shows some similarities to typical Confucian style learning as classes are typically teacher led with the studying of texts being the main form of input (Jin & Cortazzi, 2006).

Furthermore, Jin and Cortazzi (2006) point out that Confucian learning utilises imitation and memorisation, which also shares some parallels with the genre approach to teaching writing (Swales, 1990). Finally, in Confucian style teaching, students are taught to be “reflective” and to “read and ponder”, but also to “raise doubts and ask” (Jin & Cortazzi, 2006). Again, this to some extent mirrors genre-based pedagogy, as Hyland (2018) states that students are not only receivers of knowledge in the form of genre specific moves, but also active participants in their own learning in which students reflect on the structure of texts but also are encouraged to question the authority of texts. Finally, at stage 4, which occurs at the end of the course, the participants could be separated into two distinct general categories. Some students stated that they felt confident in their ability to write in an academic way and pointed out that they had the tools to apply what they had learnt to the writing they will come across when they start their degrees. These students highlighted that they knew how to structure their writing and to develop arguments and that they knew how to use source texts in their own writing and to avoid plagiarism. On the other hand, another group of students were more tentative about their development and felt that they still had a lot to learn. Previous studies of university student adjustment (Black & Mendenhall, 1990; Major, 2005; Quan et al., 2016) tend to show a monolithic view of students at the final stage in their models that does not account for the various developmental paths that students may take. The current research has found that while students do go through a process of adjustment over an EAP course, some students may progress at a quicker rate in terms of adjusting to the demands of academic writing in the UK. It is important for EAP courses to identify students who may be in need of extra support when they continue onto their degree courses.

139