This study interpreted the meanings of writing in English by examining the indescribable feelings or felt sense of EFL writers through their experience and practice of English writing. To investigate the emotions connected to English writing among 10 Japanese EFL learners, this study employed TAE (Thinking at the Edge) methods. Data were collected from 10 TAE worksheets and individual interviews following the seven phases of the TAE procedure (Tokumaru, 2011). The findings indicated that the learners struggled to express themselves in English due to the linguistic differences between Japanese and English, which negatively affected their confidence in writing. Through their experiences of writing in English, the participants emphasized the importance of improving their writing proficiency and building their sense of achievement derived from their written work. This presentation will discuss the potential for using the TAE approach to further explore the emotions involved in L2 writing.

A long-standing issue concerning EAP is the integration of context that resembles the type of academic content students engages in during tertiary education. In English for General Academic Purposes (EGAP), the foci are on the development of academic language, and receptive and productive skills, with generic academic content acting as the disregarded background yet frames students to apply these skill sets. The typical content is heavily orientated towards knowledge which resembles student schema and rarely if ever, reaches the depth demonstrated in mainstream academic subjects. Instead, diverse rhetorical modes are offered since as Stockwell (2006) argues, varying the academic genres encourages learners to produce different interpretations on a level of language and organization. In efforts to bridge the gap between academic writing and academic learning, in the past year, an EMI university in northern Japan amended the advanced research writing course (hereafter, Composition II). The changes involved enrolled students combining Composition II with another content course thereby constructing a pedagogical rationale where English writing structures, strategies and stages for the primary assessment were taught, with the content courses offering authentic disciplinary knowledge, sources and ultimately, content for their Composition II paper. After analysis of the conducted interviews this presentation reports the collaborative practices and challenges between the EAP and content faculty and offers implications for EAP and EMI.

We report findings from the analysis of essays written by 113 first-year university students that have implications for teaching beginning L2 writing in Korean contexts. The essays were written in three languages: Standard Arabic, French, and English at two major public universities. Three equivalent prompts in each language were developed in which students were asked to make and defend a choice between two alternatives, one per essay. The essays were scored by teachers literate in all three languages and each essay was coded by two graduate students for evidence of translingual practices across the three essays. Five categories of translingual practices were identified, serving different communicative and rhetorical purposes. A significant positive correlation was also found between the amount of translingual practice identified in the writers’ essays and their holistic scores, sentence complexity measured by t-units, and word count. After presenting our findings, we hope to extend our discussion to translingualism in Korea and invite discussion from the audience.

Should I use pairs, groups of 3, 4 or more? The answer to this often-asked question usually depends on the aims of the lesson but is often guided by teacher intuition and not research. This study aims to address this issue with respect to one common task: peer review of writing. Following earlier research by the author that found more feedback moves in triads over pairs, this study compared triads and groups of four. The study involved two classes of university undergraduates (n=36) studying English in Seoul. There were three peer review sessions for three essays during one semester. Class A was divided into 4s, then 3s, then mixed 3s and 4s; Class B was divided into 3s, 4s, then mixed 3s and 4s. The results show more feedback moves were discussed in 3s rather than 4s, but this conflicted with student reflections. Implications for teaching are discussed.