Loading…

Analysis of the empirical research in the journal of second language writing at its 25th year (1992–2016)

•The typical research contexts and participants were undergraduates in U.S. universities or colleges.•The most frequently observed methodological approach was qualitative.•The top three data sources used by L2 writing researchers were multiple, text samples, and elicitation.•The main theoretical ori...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of second language writing 2018-09, Vol.41, p.41-54
Main Authors: Riazi, Mehdi, Shi, Ling, Haggerty, John
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:•The typical research contexts and participants were undergraduates in U.S. universities or colleges.•The most frequently observed methodological approach was qualitative.•The top three data sources used by L2 writing researchers were multiple, text samples, and elicitation.•The main theoretical orientations were cognitive, social, socio-cognitive, genre, contrastive rhetoric, and critical theories.•The most common research foci were feedback and writing instruction. In this historical survey, we review 272 empirical research articles published in the Journal of Second Language Writing (JSLW) over its first quarter century of publication. We report overall and periodic analyses (1992–1999, 2000–2010, 2011–2016) in respect to the following themes: (1) contexts and participants, (2) research foci and theoretical orientations, and (3) research methodology and data sources. The typical research contexts and participants were undergraduates in U.S. universities or colleges. The most common research foci were feedback and writing instruction and the main theoretical orientations were cognitive, social, socio-cognitive, genre, contrastive rhetoric, and critical theories. The most frequently used research methodology was qualitative and the top three data sources used by L2 writing researchers were multiple sources, text samples, and elicitation. Based on the findings, we make suggestions for future research in studies of L2 writing. Along with Tony Silva’s reflections on our results, the present analysis gives readers a birds-eye view of the scholarship on L2 writing over the last 25 years as represented in the JSLW.
ISSN:1060-3743
1873-1422
DOI:10.1016/j.jslw.2018.07.002