Blog 10.

It is one thing to learn the theories for correcting writing errors of the ESL students, and it is quite another to implement them. When given the choice of editing the student's writing errors in a comprehensive manner with the first draft vs. the selective error treatment, I initially thought that comprehensive error treatment was better, to avoid errors fossilizing in the student’s mind. (Ferris and Hedgcock, 2014, p. 286).  Having participated in the writing process with a ten-year-old ESL student, and noticing when his ideas seem to flow, I now feel that during the initial draft of a multi-draft process, I should encourage the free flow of ideas with no error correction. After all, during a timed exam, an initial draft may be all the student has time to produce. As I help to tutor this boy for the SSAT exam, I cannot help but think of it as a disservice, if I interrupted his idea flow.  

A complimentary focus during the initial drafting is the focus on identifying the main points, and supporting points, so that there is some logical flow to the first draft writing.  Even though I cannot guarantee the topic prompts for the SSAT, I am encouraging him to read about topics he is interested in and then to summarize that story in the main point, supporting points, conclusion framework.  Schuster (2003) suggests that students write often, after reading prose a little over their heads. I am testing this approach this summer with this student. He will have an opportunity to develop his confidence in producing a writing product so that shortly he can begin to reflect his emotions in the story.

Reference

Ferris, Dana R., Hedgcock, John. 2014. Teaching L2 Composition: Purpose, Process, and Practice. Taylor and Francis. Kindle Edition.

Edgar H Schuster, 2003. Breaking the Rules, Liberating Writers Through Innovative Grammar Instruction. Heinemann, Portsmouth, NH.