Home Chinese University EFL Teachers’ and Students’ Beliefs About EFL Writing: Differences, Influences, and Pedagogical Implications
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Chinese University EFL Teachers’ and Students’ Beliefs About EFL Writing: Differences, Influences, and Pedagogical Implications

  • Yan Ding

    Yan DING is a lecturer at the School of Languages and Communication Studies, Beijing Jiaotong University. She holds a Ph.D. in linguistics from the University of Hong Kong. Her research interests include the learning and teaching of EFL vocabulary and writing, design of English MOOCs, and learner emotions.

    EMAIL logo
    and Ting Zhao

    Ting ZHAO is an associate professor at the School of Foreign Languages for Business, Southwestern University of Finance and Economics. She holds a Ph.D. in linguistics from the University of Cambridge. Her main research interest lies in the learning and teaching of EFL vocabulary and writing in EAP and ESP contexts.

Published/Copyright: August 16, 2019
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

This study investigates Chinese university EFL teachers’ and students’ beliefs about what determines the text quality of EFL writing via a mixed-method analysis of data collected by questionnaire, interview, and diagnostic and self-diagnostic feedback on students’ essays. The results indicate that: First, both the teachers and students attached much importance to language, but the teachers put significantly more emphasis on organization and content whereas the students put significantly more emphasis on vocabulary; Second, the beliefs of students were heavily influenced by their conceptions of the purposes of EFL writing tasks and the assessment criteria adopted to mark their writing; Third, the disparity between teachers’ and students’ beliefs caused them to emphasize different aspects of an essay when giving feedback; Finally, students’ beliefs had a negative impact on the development of effective writing strategies. Pedagogical implications are suggested.

About the authors

Yan Ding

Yan DING is a lecturer at the School of Languages and Communication Studies, Beijing Jiaotong University. She holds a Ph.D. in linguistics from the University of Hong Kong. Her research interests include the learning and teaching of EFL vocabulary and writing, design of English MOOCs, and learner emotions.

Ting Zhao

Ting ZHAO is an associate professor at the School of Foreign Languages for Business, Southwestern University of Finance and Economics. She holds a Ph.D. in linguistics from the University of Cambridge. Her main research interest lies in the learning and teaching of EFL vocabulary and writing in EAP and ESP contexts.

References

Baleghizadeh, S., & Hajizadeh, T. (2014). Self- and teacher-assessment in an EFL writing class. Gist Education & Learning Research Journal, 8 99-117.10.26817/16925777.116Search in Google Scholar

Barcelos, A. M. F., & Kalaja, P. (2011). Introduction to beliefs about SLA revisited. System 39(3), 281-289.10.1016/j.system.2011.07.001Search in Google Scholar

Bazeley, P., & Jackson, K. (2013). Qualitative data analysis with NVivo (2nd ed.). London: Sage.Search in Google Scholar

Borg, M. (2001). Key concepts in ELT: Teachers’ beliefs. ELT Journal 55(2), 186-188.10.1093/elt/55.2.186Search in Google Scholar

Chen, J. L. (2016). High-stake English test raters’ social psychological considerations in the essay rating process. Foreign Language Learning Theory and Practice 153(1), 47-54.Search in Google Scholar

Cumming, A. (2003). Experienced ESL/EFL writing instructors’ conceptualizations of their teaching: Curriculum options and implications. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Exploring dynamics of second language writing (pp. 71–92). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139524810.007Search in Google Scholar

Diab, R. L. (2005). Teachers’ and students’ beliefs about responding to ESL writing: A case study. TESL Canadian Journal 23(1), 28-43.10.18806/tesl.v23i1.76Search in Google Scholar

Elo, S., & Kyngäs, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62 107-115.10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.xSearch in Google Scholar

Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2015). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics 5(1), 1-4.10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11Search in Google Scholar

Jacobs, H. L., Zingraf, S. A., Wormuth, D. R., Hartfiel, V. F., & Hughey, J. B. (1981). Testing ESL composition: A practical approach Rowley: Newbury House.Search in Google Scholar

Khanalizadeh, B., & Allami, H. (2012). The impact of teachers’ belief on EFL writing instruction. Theory & Practice in Language Studies 2(2), 334-342.10.4304/tpls.2.2.334-342Search in Google Scholar

Lee, I., (2009). Ten mismatches between teachers’ beliefs and written feedback practice. ELT Journal 63(1), 13-22.10.1093/elt/ccn010Search in Google Scholar

List, D. (2002). Know your audience: A practical guide to media research Original Books. Retrieved from http://www.audiencedialogue.net/kya.htmlSearch in Google Scholar

Ma, J. (2016). The influence of writing beliefs on two Chinese EFL university students’ use of peer feedback: An ecological perspective. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature 5(3), 247-256.Search in Google Scholar

Mahnam, L., & Nejadansari, D. (2012). The effects of different pre-writing strategies on Iranian EFL writing achievement. International Education Studies 5(1), 154-160.10.5539/ies.v5n1p154Search in Google Scholar

Matsuno, S. (2009). Self-, peer-, and teacher-assessments in Japanese university EFL writing classrooms. Language Testing 26(1), 75-100.10.1177/0265532208097337Search in Google Scholar

Montgomery, J. L., & Baker, W., (2007). Teacher-written feedback: Student perceptions, teacher self-assessment, and actual teacher performance. Journal of Second Language Writing 16(2), 82-99.10.1016/j.jslw.2007.04.002Search in Google Scholar

Neumann, H. (2014). Teacher assessment of grammatical ability in second language academic writing: A case study. Journal of Second Language Writing 24(2), 83-107.10.1016/j.jslw.2014.04.002Search in Google Scholar

Robb, T., Ross, S., & Shortreed, I. (1986). Salience of feedback on error and its effect on EFL writing quality. TESOL Quarterly 20(1), 83-95.10.2307/3586390Search in Google Scholar

Rosch, E., Simpson, C., & Miller, R. S. (1976). Structural bases of typicality effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & Performance 2(4), 491-502.10.1037/0096-1523.2.4.491Search in Google Scholar

Storch, N., & Wigglesworth, G. (2010). Students’ engagement with feedback on writing: The role of learner agency/beliefs. In R. Batstone (Ed.) Sociocognitive perspectives on language use and language learning (pp.167-185). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Xie, Q. (2015). “I must impress the raters!” An investigation of Chinese test-takers’ strategies to manage rater impressions. Assessing Writing, 25 22-37.10.1016/j.asw.2015.05.001Search in Google Scholar

Xu, Y., & Wu, Z. (2012). Test-taking strategies for a high-stakes writing test: An exploratory study of 12 Chinese EFL learners. Assessing Writing, 17 174-190.10.1016/j.asw.2012.03.001Search in Google Scholar

Yang, M., Badger, R., & Yu, Z. (2006). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese EFL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing 15(3), 179-200.10.1016/j.jslw.2006.09.004Search in Google Scholar

Yang, L., & Gao, S. (2013). Beliefs and practices of Chinese university teachers in EFL writing instruction. Language Culture & Curriculum 26(2), 128-145.10.1080/07908318.2013.794817Search in Google Scholar

Zhang, X. (2017). Exploring a novice Chinese EFL teacher’s writing beliefs and practices: A systemic functional perspective. International Journal of Language Studies 11(1), 95-118.Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2019-08-16
Published in Print: 2019-06-26

© 2019 FLTRP, Walter de Gruyter, Cultural and Education Section British Embassy

Downloaded on 18.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/CJAL-2019-0010/html
Scroll to top button