Cognitive Orientation In Teaching Writing
By
Hamid Allami, PhD,
University of Yazd, IRAN
e-mail: hamid_allami@yahoo.com
and
Mohammad
Ali Salmani-Nodoushan, PhD,
University of Zanjan, IRAN
e-mail: nodushan@ut.ac.ir
Get the List of 4,500+ Translation Agencies Now! No Recurring Membership Fees!
The
present paper underscores the importance of the cognitive
orientation of EFL students in their success in writing
courses. A few suggestions are made as to how EFL
teachers can put their students on the right cognitive
path in their writings.
1. INTRODUCTION
Since
1970, when language teaching methodology released
itself from the shackles of 'oral approaches', it
seemed notably reasonable to develop a new method
in which the curricular plans would be consistent
with, and ruled by, objectives the language learner
conceives in relation to acquiring a second language.
Hence, some corners of second language process, which
were kept in dark, began glittering in the light of
new trends. 'Writing', by definition, was a skill
whose identity was rediscovered when its negligence
as a 'by-product' in oral approaches was removed,
and stood as an ultimate goal by itself for an enormous
number of foreign language learners.
Notwithstanding the fact that
a sizable portion of the syllabus is allocated to
writing courses, a desirable outcome has not often
been obtained. Many class hours are spent on teaching
sentence structures and combinations. Yet, when asked
to write a short paragraph, the learners will find
it terribly painstaking. The inefficiency with writing
courses, as has already been detected, is attributed
to a number of factors, among which the inadequacy
of cognitive competence stands out.
The purpose of this article
is two-fold. First, an attempt will be made to expound
how the skill of writing is in line with cognitive
improvement. Second, an effort will be made to propose
a cognitively oriented approach to the task.
One of the terms currently
used in education, linguistics, and teacher training
today is undoubtedly competence. We strive
daily to produce language competency in our students
so that they can deal with facts, findings, and opinions,
as in the case of other academic disciplines. We try
to develop in our students a relative mastery of language
structures and usage, logical presentation and development
of ideas, and the creative use of imaginative symbolic
thinking. Yet, in practice we often feel rather embarrassed
to confess that not only have we not taken further
any successful steps to achieve the goal, but we also
have deteriorated the kinds of motivations with which
students had armed themselves to face the eventualities
of the course.
2. WHAT IS A COGNITIVELY ORIENTATED
APPROACH
A cognitively oriented approach,
in Mann's terms (1970), is "primarily concerned
with the refinement of intellectual operation."
It may seem that this description may rarely refer
to curriculum content. However, when examined more
carefully, it can well account for the central problem
of curriculum as that of both sharpening the intellectual
process and developing a set of cognitive skills applicable
to learning.
The approach is largely process
oriented in two senses: (1) It identifies the goals
of teaching as providing a repertoire of essentially
'content-independent' cognitive skills; And, (2) it
is also concerned with understanding how the process
of learning occurs in the classroom (Bruce, 1960).
Here, the relationship between the learner and the
materials is of prime importance. Syllabus can be,
accordingly, defined as the constant interaction between
the learner and the materials to which he is exposed.
The problem of the syllabus designer is thus to identify
the appropriate setting through which a reconciliation
is made between the learner and the situation.
Typically, an analysis of what
groups of language learners require to know in order
to effectively participate in their particular situations
depends heavily on the particularity of those very
situations. The aim of a cognitive approach is to
develop an insight in the learner, enabling him to
make his own selections and interpretations of the
existing situations. The insight provides the learner
with opportunities to stretch his skills beyond the
classroom setting.
3. COGNITIVE ORIENTATION IN
WRITING
The cognitive process orientation
tends to develop a deductive approach to the
process of 'writing'. Unlike the inductive approach
in which writing is seen as a practice in language
usage, the deductive approach views writing as an
organization of ideas. As for the former, writing
incorporates correct language into correct usage,
resulting from the development of linguistic competence.
So, a major bulk of class activity is devoted to the
enhancement of 'usage' (Widdowson,1984) such as subject/verb
consistency, active/passive voice, and so on. However,
writing is not a linguistic process per se.
It encompasses a wide range of exercises that go beyond
the linguistic scope.
It should be made clear that
an emphasis on developing cognitive competence does
not detract from the significance of linguistic competence.
Needless to say, the student should have activities
stimulated through the linguistic approach as well
as activities introduced by the new approach. In fact,
linguistic knowledge affords the building blocks out
of which the learner's thought is shaped. The learner,
however, needs to get the blocks into shape. He needs
to learn how to think logically, and how to develop
his ideas convincingly. The teacher's job is, therefore,
to develop the learner's cognitive abilities, rather
than merely focusing on the problems of syntax and
vocabulary. The cognitive approach conceptualizes
writing as a means of directing learners to assess
their own structures, which, in turn, leads to the
understanding of Communicative Competence.
As Di Pietro (1982) states, matters of grammatical
form are best explained in strategic contexts.
The process of writing is almost
always directed towards readers whose expectations
shape the form and content of the message. Therefore,
writers should always discover solutions, as they
move on, to the problem of interaction with readers.
They should modify their discourse as they attempt
to get closer to their intended meaning. This is the
time when the teacher's role carries the greatest
latitude in the classroom. It is the teacher's behavior
which guides that of the student. The teachers' main
part is to activate 'productive thinking' in their
pupils through developing appropriate strategies with
which the writers can approximate their meaning. They
engage their students in different activities, use
particular procedures, or employ specific techniques.
Such an approach may look similar
to 'discovery learning' in the sense that active
participation by the student is an indispensable condition
for learning, and that it aims to enhance 'productive
thinking' of the learner. However, the two approaches
should not be confused. Discovery learning approach
is too extremely process-oriented for which to assign
any objectives refuses to count. In other words, one
cannot identify any clear objectives for such an approach,
because the structure of the stimuli is too complex
to be determined in advance. In the cognitive approach,
the role that the teacher plays in the classroom is
of vital importance. S/he is not a mere mediator between
the learner and the phenomenon of writing, but rather
an authoritative source of information that appropriates
and guides the 'productive thinking' in their students.
4. THE TEACHERS' ROLES
In this approach to writing
the student's attention should be towed away from
mere linguistic structures to the 'communicative part'
linguistic ingredients play in 'writing'. The learner
should be made aware of the functions of different
grammatical structures. Actual writing begins when
learners having already acquired the basic principles
of the language-how different forms are made and what
functions they fulfill. The common term for this stage
is 'paragraph writing'.
Usually at 'paragraph writing',
the learners become familiar with different methods
of paragraph development. They are taught the narrative,
descriptive, and other paragraph types. They learn
how rhetorics is used in different texts. After a
general statement about each type, sample paragraphs
of a specific nature are presented to the learner.
This is where writing begins. Students are asked to
write a similar paragraph on a suggested topic. The
compositions are then proofread by the teacher. Unfortunately,
the main part of the teacher's correction concerns
that of the learner's grammatical mistakes and little
is done with respect to the overall organization of
the composition.
It is mainly at this stage
that students find themselves at a loss, (i.e. being
unable to write an acceptable composition). Often
they know where to begin, but they do not know how
to develop a piece of writing. The problem is not
with 'rhetorical functions' (to use Trimble's term,
1985) in writing since they have been taught about
each type of paragraph effectively through a lot of
explanation and examples. Nor are the students incapable
of producing 'rhetorical techniques' since in their
earlier courses they have been exposed to different
sentence structures, and have done a lot of practice
in this relation. The main trouble lies in the intervening
sections, or what can be eloquently termed 'operational
intermediates'. If the process of writing is sketched
in the form of a tree diagram, then it could be said
that the sections appearing between the higher nodes
and the lower ones tend to be missing in the students'
compositions.
Very often we notice in our
students' compositions that an idea is left out without
being fully developed, and that there is a sudden
leap from the rhetorical functions to the rhetorical
techniques. This problem can be attributed to the
student's excessive preoccupation with correct structures,
which overwhelms their reasoning capacity. They are
so absorbed in the forms that the outlining of their
ideas is neglected. Here, through concentrating on
the logical expansion, the student should be informed
of the primacy of thought over linguistic expressions.
It is necessary that the operational
intermediates be employed in all types of paragraphs.
The learners should know how much information they
are required to put in their compositions so that
the readers may follow their line of argument with
ease. They should also learn how to order and sequence
their ideas so that the readers will not be left alone
in the labyrinth of the writer's clumsy composition.
Students also need to be equipped with a knowledge
of the so-called 'Cohesive Devices' and the application
of this knowledge in writing. Although their significance
has been repeatedly indicated to the students, cohesive
devices are often absent in our students' compositions.
Often, the sentences written by the students are so
loosely conjoined that the readers may feel they have
been unevenly fit in the wrong place. Therefore, a
good deal of practice in using cohesive devices seems
necessary. It should be noted that the teaching of
such devices in isolation would not be of much use.
Rather, it would be more advantageous if they received
sufficient attention while different types of composition-argumentative
or expository-are practiced.
5. COGNITIVE PROCESS TECHNIQUES
The commonest sequence in practicing
types of writing suggests that the narrative be exercised
first. (Psycho)logically speaking, it is good start.
As Goldman (1972) says, you may admit that people
have less trouble when components of any entity are
given to them. In narration the writer is provided
with the subject matter he wants to write about, since
narration demands little or almost no reasoning capacity.
The students are often successful in narrative writing,
for they need almost no extra components
about the sequence of events to cope with. However,
the students still need to develop productive thinking
in order to connect sets of events together. The usual
procedure in the narrative is that the topic is given
to the students, and they are required to depict an
imaginary or real situation on which they write. The
suggestion here is to hand out pictures that, when
looked at serially, provide a brief account of stories.
It is assumed that such pictures can spur the cognitive
ability of the students. They should think of a logical
or natural sequence for the pictures.
Description is another type
of writing. It is often suggested that description
be presented after narration. Description is a little
more troublesome for students because it is, in fact,
the first step towards reasoning. In writing descriptive
paragraphs the students need to think of the important
details they want to put into their compositions.
They should be informed as to which pieces of information
are needed for their specific compositions. Pictures
can still be used to provide the students with the
theme of their compositions. After looking carefully
at the pictures, the students should judge what is
essential to put into their writing.
The other types of writing
include explanation and argumentation, which are the
most difficult, for the students should think of both
the subject matter and rational writing to convince
the readers. At this stage, pictures are of little
use because they do not provide an in-depth cognitive
framework for the students. By this time, the students
are supposed to have developed their reasoning capacity
in such a way as to write convincingly and appropriately.
Their compositions are expected to qualify for both
sufficient information and logical ordering. Now,
the teacher's role becomes less important, and the
students are expected to have reached a level of language
competency to work independently. Still the teacher
can help. At this stage, the teachers' job is to identify
the common logical fallacies that the students may
face. Teachers can also provide their students with
examples-of written materials-that illustrate these
fallacies and pitfalls; they can also make some suggestions
as to how the students can avoid them.
In brief, the main component
of instruction in a cognitive approach is 'revision'.
As they take on the role of both writers and readers,
the students are taught to review their writings,
predicting what problems they may have, and what possible
reactions they may show towards their writings. The
suggestion here is to write some of the compositions
on the board or to use an Overhead/Opaque projector
to this end. The students may then be urged to identify
the mistakes, both grammatical and rhetorical, in
their compositions. This procedure can develop an
interactional attitude, and enhance productive thinking
in the students.
6. REFERENCES
Altman, Howard B. and C. Vaughan James. 1980. Foreign
Language Teaching: Meeting Individual Needs. Oxford:
Pergamon Press.
Littlewood, William. 1981. Communicative Language Teaching:
An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Nunan, D. 1987. The Teacher As Curriculum Developer.
Adelaide: National Curriculum Resource Center.
Prabhu, N. S. 1987. Second Language Pedagogy: A Perspective.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Trimble, Louis. 1985. English for Science And Technology:
A Discourse Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Widdowson, H. G. 1978. Teaching Language As Communication.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Widdowson, H. G. 1984. Learning Purpose And Language Use.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Read
more articles - Free!
E-mail
this article to your colleague!
Need
more translation jobs? Click here!
Translation
agencies are welcome to register here - Free!
Freelance
translators are welcome to register here - Free!
Subscribe
to TranslationDirectory.com newsletter - Free!
Take
part in TranslationDirectory.com poll - your voice counts!
|