This study modified the questionnaire for assessing Japanese EFL learners’ use of writing strategies, developed by Yamanishi (2009). The modified questionnaire holds 33 items that are classified in four categories—Global Planning, Local Planning, Review/ Revision, and Avoidance—and demonstrates high reliability. In addition, I examined 179 Japanese EFL university students’ use of writing strategies using the questionnaire. The results revealed several findings discussed above.
These findings will be useful for teachers who are in charge of EFL writing classes. I present one example. According to the findings, Japanese EFL learners with insufficient writing proficiency have difficulties in thinking up English expressions to write next and tend to give up writing; however, they also appear to be poor at grasping the whole concept of their writing behavior. It is advisable for teachers to explain to the less proficient learners the importance of global planning. By understanding the importance of global planning (e.g., assuming a certain kind of readers and/or thinking about the task requirement), it is expected that such learners’ ways of writing will improve and be closer to those of more proficient learners.
The limitation of this study is that the findings would be sample dependent. Therefore, it is desirable that many writing teachers actually use the questionnaire in their own classes to examine the tendency of learners’ use of writing strategies. The questionnaire provided in the present study will surely be helpful for such teachers, and their feedback from using it will help in improving it further.
Notes
1. The alpha level was set at .05. However, with three proficiency levels being incorporated in this study, using the alpha level would cause a risk of making a Type I error when multiple comparisons were conducted. Therefore, in multiple comparisons, I decided to use the Bonferroni correction (a method of dividing alpha level by the number of groups) and corrected the alpha level at .0167 (.05/3). This means that an asterisk (*) was used when p
< .0167 in Tables 4, 5, 6, and 8.
2. For more information about effect sizes, see Mizumoto and Takeuchi (2008).
62 YAMANISHI, Hiroyuki Acknowledgement
This study was partially supported by Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists (B) No. 20720147 from MEXT.
References
Anzai, Y., & Uchida, N. (1981). Kodomo wa ikani sakubun wo kakuka [How do children produce writings?]. Japanese Journal of Educational Psychology, 29, 323-332.
Benesse Corporation (n.d.). Juken no mae ni yomu shiori [The Examination Guide].
Bereiter, C., Burtis, P. J., & Scardamalia, M. (1988). Cognitive operations in constructing main points in written composition. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 261-278.
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Emig, J. (1971). The composing processes of twelfth graders. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. S. (1980). Identifying the organization of writing processes. In L.
Gregg & E. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing (pp. 3-33). Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Mizumoto, A., & Takeuchi, O. (2008). Kenkyu ronbun ni okeru kokaryo no hokoku no tameni [Basics and considerations for reporting effect sizes in research papers]. Studies in English Language Teaching, 31, 57-66.
Sasaki, M. (2000). Toward an empirical model of EFL writing processes: An exploratory study. Journal of Second Language Writing, 9, 259-291.
Sasaki, M. (2002). Building an empirically-based model of EFL learners’ writing processes. In S. Ransdell & M. Barbier (Eds.), Studies in writing: Vol. 11. New directions for research in L2 writing (pp. 49-80). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Sasaki, M. (2004). A multiple-data analysis of the 3.5-year development of EFL student writers. Language Learning, 54, 525-582.
Yamanishi, H. (2009). Developing a questionnaire to assess Japanese high school students’
writing strategies for expository compositions: A pilot study. Studies in English Language Teaching, 32, 33-42.
Japanese Learners’ Use of Writing Strategies 63
JACET関西支部ラ テ ング指導研究会紀要 第8号 (2009)
Appendix: The Modified Questionnaire
の う 英文を書いた 関して，以下の質問 べて 回答してく さい。
(Answer the following items concerning your behavior during writing.)
0: 当て い 1: 少し当て 2: 当て 3: 非常 当て
Global Planning (Passage Level) 1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
め 大 書いて，後 細 修正をし 書いた。
(I wrote roughly at first, and then wrote making detailed modifications.)
内容 と う 文の順番を考え 書いた。
(I wrote thinking about the order of sentences to improve the flow of the passage.)
内容を とめ ための表現を考え 書いた。
(I wrote thinking about expressions to give the passage unity.)
表現 一貫性 あ う して書いた。
(I wrote using coherent expressions.)
物語調 書こうとした。
(I tried to write the passage as a narrative.)
日本語 考えを整理して ，英語 書いた。
(I planned in Japanese first, and then I wrote in English.)
課題 何 要求さ てい を考え 書いた。
(I wrote thinking what was required in the task.)
課題の趣旨を読者 伝え う 書いた。
(I wrote trying to convey the theme of the task to the reader.)
課題内容を く理解して 書いた。
(I wrote after I understood the task deeply.)
結び 文章のオチ の表現 気を遣 て書いた。
(I wrote paying attention to the expression of the concluding remarks.)
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 Local Planning (Word/Phrase/Sentence Level)
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
冠詞や単数形や複数形 注意し 書いた。
(I wrote paying attention to articles and the singular/plural.)
語と語の組 合わせ オム を考え 書いた。
(I wrote thinking about the collocation of words (e.g., idioms).)
思い いた英語の表現 日本語の意味 あ てい 考え 書いた。
(I wrote thinking whether an English expression corresponds to its equivalent in Japanese.)
思い いた複数の表現 ，最 ふさわしい表現を選び 書いた。
(I wrote choosing the most appropriate expression from several expressions that occurred to me.)
次 の う 内容を書こう 考え 書いた。
(I wrote thinking about what to write next.)
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3
64 YAMANISHI, Hiroyuki 16.
17.
書 や い表現を使え う ，書く内容を調整した。
(I modified the content of my writing in order to use easier expressions.)
定型的 表現 決 た言い回し を気 し 書いた。
(I wrote paying attention to a fixed expression or a cliché.)
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 Review/Revision
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
課題を見直して，書いた内容を修正した。
(I reviewed the task and modified what I had written.)
課題を見直して，足 い情報を書 足した。
(I reviewed the task and added information to my writing.)
書いた内容を見直して，表現 簡潔 う 修正した。
(I reviewed my writing and modified the expressions to be simple.)
書いた内容を見直して，全体的 表現 文章の構成 を修正した。
(I reviewed my writing and modified its structure.)
書いた内容を見直して，足 い情報を付加した。
(I reviewed my writing and added information to it.)
書いた内容を見直して，内容の と 良く う 修正した。
(I reviewed my writing and modified it to be coherent.)
書いた内容を見直して，不要 情報を削除した。
(I reviewed my writing and deleted unnecessary information from it.)
書いた内容を見直して，部分的 表現 文法， を修正した。
(I reviewed my writing and modified its grammar and spelling.)
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 Avoidance
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
の う 書こう 考えた ，あ めて作文を終了した。
(I thought about how to keep writing, but I gave up continuing.)
書いてい 途中 違和感を覚えた ，その 書 進めた。
(I felt something was wrong with my writing, but I kept writing.)
書 たい内容 あ た ，表現 思い浮 たの 書 た。
(I wanted to write, but I couldn’t think up expressions so I gave up.)
書 くそう 箇所 書 た。
(I avoided writing parts that seemed to be hard to write.)
日本語 書けて 英語 表現 の 難しい内容 書 た。
(I avoided writing content that is difficult to express in English.)
書 足 い内容 あ た ，書くと大変そう た 書 た。
(I wanted to write more, but I felt it was difficult to write so I gave up.)
書こうとした内容 あ た ，ぼ を出さ い う 書 た。
(I had something to write, but I avoided writing it so as not to show my deficiencies.)
文の しいと感 た箇所 あ た ，気 し い う した。
(I felt something was wrong with the sentence connections, but I ignored them.)
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3