Article published In: Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education
Vol. 12:2 (2024) ► pp.162–191
The impact of adjunct instruction on EFL academic writing at university
Published online: 2 February 2024
https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.22005.roq
https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.22005.roq
Abstract
Adjunct instruction (AI), a form of content-based instruction, can provide students with opportunities to learn disciplinary discourse in context. Few studies have explored the extent to which AI affects students’ written production over time. This study aims to analyze the impact of a 60-hour AI course in English on writing complexity, accuracy, fluency (CAF) and on holistic measures in two groups with different exposure to English. The participants were 51 first-year Dentistry students from two strands, English-Medium of Instruction (EMI) (n = 21) and first language (L1 Catalan/Spanish) (n = 30). After 60 hours of AI, the EMI+AI group improved lexical diversity, while the L1+AI group improved accuracy and some holistic measures. Correlations between CAF and holistic measures indicate defining features of second language writing in each strand. The benefits of adjunct instruction for writing development are discussed in the light of the two settings explored.
Resumen
La instrucción adjunta (AI, por sus siglas en inglés), una forma de instrucción basada en el contenido, puede ofrecer a los estudiantes la oportunidad de aprender vocabulario de su disciplina en contexto. Pocos estudios han explorado cómo la AI afecta a la producción escrita de los estudiantes a lo largo del tiempo. Este estudio analiza el impacto de un curso de AI en inglés de 60 horas en la complejidad de la escritura, la precisión, la fluidez (CAF, por sus siglas en inglés) y también sobre medidas holísticas en dos grupos con diferente exposición al inglés. Los participantes son 51 estudiantes de primero de Odontología, EMI (n = 21) y L1 (es decir, catalán/español, n = 30). Tras 60 horas de AI, el grupo EMI+AI mejoró la diversidad léxica, mientras que el grupo L1+AI mejoró la corrección lingüística y algunas medidas holísticas. Se encontraron correlaciones entre CAF y las medidas holísticas que indican rasgos definitorios de la escritura académica en L2. Se discuten los beneficios de AI para el desarrollo de la escritura en los dos contextos pedagógicos explorados.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Literature review
- 2.1Content-based instruction in higher education
- 2.2Content-based instruction and written production
- 3.The study
- 3.1Context
- 3.2Participants
- 3.3Treatment: The adjunct instruction course
- 3.4Instrument
- 3.5Data coding and analysis
- 3.5.1The corpus
- 3.5.2Quantitative analysis
- Complexity
- Accuracy
- Fluency
- 3.5.3Qualitative analysis
- 3.5.4Study design and statistical analyses
- 4.Results and discussion
- 5.Conclusion
- Notes
References
References (37)
Ai, H., & Lu, X. (2013). A corpus-based comparison of syntactic complexity in NNS and NS university students’ writing. In Díaz-Negrillo, P. Ballier, & P. Thomson (Eds), Automatic Treatment and Analysis of Learner Corpus Data, 249–264. John Benjamins. [URL].
Ament, J., & Pérez-Vidal, C. (2015). Linguistic outcomes of English medium instruction programmes in higher education: A study on Economics undergraduates at a Catalan university. Higher Learning Research Communications, 5(1), 47–68.
Brinton, D. M., Snow, M. A., & Wesche, M. B. (2003). Content-based second language instruction (Classics ed.). University of Michigan Press.
Bulté, B., & Housen, A. (2015). Evaluating short-term changes in L2 complexity development. Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación, 63(4), 42–76.
Council of Europe (2020). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment – Companion volume, Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg, available at [URL]
Coyle, Y., & Roca de Larios, J. (2014). Exploring the role played by error correction and models on children’s reported noticing and output production in a L2 writing task. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 36(3), 451–485.
Coyle, Y., & de Larios, J. R. (2020). Exploring young learners’ engagement with models as a written corrective technique in EFL and CLIL settings. System, 951, 102374.
Dueñas, M. (2003). A description of prototype models for content-based language instruction in higher education. Bells: Barcelona English Language & Literature Studies, 121. [URL]
Friedl, G., & Auer, M. (2007). Erläuterungenzur novellierung der reifeprufungsverordnung fur AHS, lebende fremdsprachen (Rating scale used for assessment of the writing task). BIFIE. [URL]
Genesee, F., & Lindholm-Leary, K. (2013). Two case studies of content-based language education. Journal of Immersion and Content-based language Education, 1(1), 3–33.
Grim, F. (2008). Integrating focus on form in L2 content-enriched instruction lessons. Foreign Language Annals, 41(2), 321–346.
Hanaoka, O. (2007). Noticing from models and reformulations: A case study of two Japanese EFL Learners. Sophia Linguistica, 541, 167–192.
Jexenflicker, S., & Dalton-Puffer, C. (2010). The CLIL differential: Comparing the writing of CLIL and non-CLIL students in higher colleges of technology. In C. Dalton-Puffer, T. Nikula, & U. Smit (Eds.), Language Use and Language Learning in CLIL Classrooms (pp. 169–189). John Benjamins.
Lasagabaster, D., Doiz, A., & Pavón, V. (2018). Undergraduates’ beliefs about the role of language and team teaching in EMI courses at University. Rassegna Italiana di Linguistica Applicata, 50(2–3), 111–127. [URL]
Long, M. H. & Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on form theory, research, and practice. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition (pp. 5–41). Cambridge University Press.
Lu, X. (2010). Automatic analysis of syntactic complexity in second language writing. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 15(4), 474–496.
(2012). The relationship of lexical richness to the quality of ESL learners’ oral narratives. The Modern Language Journal, 96(2), 190–208.
Navarro Gil, N. (2018). Reflexive metadiscourse in a corpus of Spanish bachelor dissertations in EFL. Research in Corpus Linguistics, 61, 29–49.
Navarro-Gil, N. (2019). The effects of a content-based language course on students’ academic vocabulary production. CLIL Journal of Innovation and Research in Plurilingual and Pluricultural Education, 2(2), 25–42.
Paquot, M., & Plonsky, L. (2017). Quantitative research methods and study quality in learner corpus research. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research, 3(1), 61–94.
Pérez-Cañado, M. L. (2012). CLIL research in Europe: Past, present, and future. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 15(3), 315–341.
Polio, C., & Yoon, H. J. (2018). The reliability and validity of automated tools for examining variation in syntactic complexity across genres. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 28(1), 165–188.
Räisänen, C., & Fortanet-Gómez, I. (2008). The state of ESP teaching and learning in Western European higher education after Bologna. ESP in European Higher Education: Integrating Language and Content, 41, 11–51.
Ready, D., & Wesche, M. (1992). An evaluation of the University of Ottawa’s sheltered program: Language teaching strategies that work. In R. J. Courchêne, J. I. Glidden, S. T. John, & C. Therien (Eds.), Comprehension-based second language teaching (pp. 389–404). University of Ottawa Press.
Rodgers, D. M. (2006). Developing content and form: Encouraging evidence from Italian content-based instruction. The Modern Language Journal, 90(3), 373–386.
Rogier, D. (2012). The effects of English-medium instruction on language proficiency of students enrolled in higher education in the UAE. (Doctoral dissertation). University of Exeter. [URL]
Römer, U. (2011). Corpus research applications in second language teaching. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 311, 205225.
Roquet, H., & Pérez-Vidal, C. (2017). Do productive skills improve in content and language integrated learning (CLIL) contexts? The case of writing. Applied Linguistics, 38 (4), 489–511.
Roquet, H., Vraciu, A., & Nicolás, F. (2019). The effect of amount of exposure to English medium instruction programmes in higher education: The case of morphosyntax. In L. Marqués-Pascual & A. Cortijo-Ocaña (Eds.), Second and Third Language Acquisition in Bilingual Contexts. (pp. 69–106). Delaware: Juan de la Cuesta, ISBN: 978-1-58871-338-4.
Roquet, H., Vraciu, A., Nicolás, F., & Pérez-Vidal, C. (2022). Adjunct instruction in higher education: Examining the effects on English foreign language proficiency. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 25 (4): 1377–1398.
Ruiz de Zarobe, Y. (2010). Written production and CLIL: An empirical study. In C. Dalton-Puffer, T. Nikula, & U. Smit (Eds.), Language Use and Language Learning in CLIL Classrooms (pp. 191–209). John Benjamins.
Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1997). Task type and task processing conditions as influences on foreign language performance. Language Teaching Research, 1(3), 185–211.
Smith, U., & Dafouz, E. (2012). Integrating content and language in higher education. Gaining insights into English-medium instruction at European universities. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Snow, M. A., & Brinton, D. M. (1988). Content-based language instruction: Investigating the effectiveness of the adjunct model. TESOL Quarterly, 22(4), 553–574.