1. A Dialogic Analysis of Instructor-Student Interactions in L2 Writing Conferences Antonio Causarano Assistant Professor of Education (PhD) & Pei-ni Lin Causarano (PhD) University of Mary Washington
The 35th Second Language Research Forum (SLRF 2016)
Thirty Years of Instructed SLA: Learning, Instruction, Learning, and Outcome
September 22-September 25, 2016
Teachers College, Columbia University

2. Introduction
Feedback in educational settings is considered an important pedagogic component to support students’ learning across different content areas and disciplines
Research suggests that the quality of feedback given by the instructor to the students is paramount to scaffold students’ learning on the content of the curriculum (Goldstein, 2004; Hyland & Hyland, 2006)

3. Introduction
Feedback in L2 writing bears a tremendous importance to guide L2 writers in the process of acquiring a new system of meaning to express their ideas on paper or any other medium (Atkinson, 2004).
One of the various models to give specific and effective feedback to L2 writers is the writing conference.

4. What the Literature Says about L2 Feedback
Literature on feedback in L2 focuses primarily on written feedback (Ewert, 2009)
Scholarship in L2 writing feedback presents few studies that focus their attention to the dialogic interaction between the instructor and L2 writers and the type and quality of questions leading to effective dialogic teaching and learning for L2 writers (Ewert, 2009).

5. What the Literature Says about L2 Feedback
Dialogic interaction in L2 writing conferences is the key to put the L2 writer at the center of learning how to write in a second language due to the fact that dialogic interaction has the potential to clarify issues occurring in L2 writing processes (Zhu, 2001).

6. What the Literature Says about L2 Feedback
As Burke and Pieterick (2010) claim feedback in L2 writing is core to lay out the blueprint for effective collaboration between instructor and L2 writer on writing in a second language.
Feedback become the dialogic ground where reflective thinking on the writing processes in a second language are analyzed and clarified to support the L2 writer in refining his/her ability to write in a second language. In turn, feedback is core to refine the writing process in a second language.

7. Bakhtin/Volosinov (1986) dialogic framework
The Utterance as the unit of analysis of language in sociocultural contexts
Meaning is found in the context in which language is used by a community of speakers
According to Bakhtin/Volosinov (1986) meaning in language emerges from the interactions between and among specific individuals or language communities within specific social and cultural contexts.

8. Purpose of The Study
This paper investigates how the dynamic of dialogic teaching during L2 writing conferences affects students’ clarification of key aspects of L2 academic writing.

9. Question
The Question: How effective are one to one L2 writing conferences in clarifying key aspect of academic writing in L2 writers during the writing process?

10. Theoretical Framework
Bakhtin’s dialogic framework:
to study the questions used by the instructor during the L2 writing conferences
Erickson's (2007) Question Typology:
to analyze the type of questions used by the instructor during the L2 Conferences with the participants

11. Method A qualitative research approach with a case study design
Sample Population:
Four international students and the instructor in a freshman ESL composition course in a large state university in the US.

12. Data Collection
Data:
Four individual writing conferences between students and instructor:
to discuss the academic papers written by the participants in this course
Procedure:
Data were collected in one semester
Each writing conference had the duration of minutes
Four conferences per participant were tape recorded and transcribed
Five post L2 Conferences interviews were tape recorded and transcribed (one for each participant and one with the instructor)

13. The Participants
Four International students participated in the this study
The four international students belonged to different countries as follows: (a) Vietnam; (b) China; (c) Mongolia; (d) Mexico.

14. The Participants
Paola’s L1: Spanish. 4 years of academic English instruction
Laura L1: Chinese (Mongolia) 7 years of academic English instruction
Tom L1: Vietnamese 10 years of academic English instruction
Susan L1: Chinese 10 years of academic English instruction

15. Coding for L2 Writing Conferences: Erickson’s Typology
Factual
Answers are simple and straight forward based on fact or knowledge
Convergent
A limited range of acceptable answers are based on inferences
Divergent
Answers can vary widely based on students’ interpretation, analysis, synthesis, and perceptions
Evaluative
Answers require sophisticated cognitive or affective judgment

16. Coding for L2 Writing Conferences
Goal: to capture how questions from both the instructor and the student had the potential to generate a dialogic process of clarification on specific components of the L2 writing process.
The coding were categorized into
TT (Teacher’s Talk)
ST (Student’s Talk)
TC (Teacher’s Comment)
SC (Student’s Clarification)

17. Analysis
To examine how various types and quality of statements foster dialogic teaching and learning during writing conferences based on Erickson's (2007) question typology
To examine how dialogic interactions support or hinder in clarifying important aspects of the L2 writing process during the L2 conferences.

18. Samples Factual Factual Factual
Paola’s Sample: TT: This is very good, OK? Did you do that? [Pointing at the graph in the paper]
ST: Yes.
TC: You have to use “There are other factors…” This is the correct form. Ok?
ST: Ok.
TT: When you use the form with “else” you have to use the following form: “What else influences…” Ok?
TT: You put a graph and a table in the paper. You have to choose one or the other. You do not have to put both in the paper. Ok?
ST: Ok
TT: Remember to describe your graph and what the graph is supposed to mean for your paper. Ok?
Factual
Factual
Convergent
Convergent
Factual

19. Samples Susan’s Conference TT: Do you have any questions? ST: No.
TT: Remember the address in the letter must be single space.
ST: OK.
TT: You talk about your experience as an international student in the letter. Remember to use always the same person in the letter. If you begin with I, you have to use throughout the letter.
TT: Do not put two negatives in the same sentence. It is confusing for a English reader.
ST: Ok.
Factual l
Convergent
Convergent

20. Samples From the Interviews: Student
Question: Have you found the L2 writing conference effective to improve your writing?
Answer (Paola): Well…I guess so. I understood what the instructor wants for the second draft. I think, I have the information I need to improve my writing…May be I should have asked more specific questions on the vocabulary…not sure about it.

21. Samples from Interview: The Instructor
Question: Were the students able to ask questions to clarify their writing?
Answer: I think that overall they were able to do so…well, my concern is that they are not taking risks in asking the hard questions to the me to clarify more of the academic writing process…I should probably have a pre-conference meeting next time I teach this course.

22. Findings
Only factual and convergent teacher’s talks and teacher’s comments were used in writing conferences
Only factual student’s talks were fostered in writing conferences

23. Discussions
Dialogic teaching was missing from the L2 writing conferences due to an overuse of factual questions instead of higher-order thinking questions, such as divergent and evaluative questions, which promote higher levels of critical thinking.
The instructor’s frequent use of factual questions led the students to use short responses, such as yes-no answers, which prevent critical clarifications in the process of writing in English as L2.

24. Implications
Although elements of dialogic interactions were not found in the L2 conferences, more research is needed to understand how to scaffold and support more dialogic interactions during L2 writing conferences to allow L2 writers to have more participation and learning opportunities in the L2 writing process.

25. Limitation & Further Exploration
This study represents a preliminary analysis on the teaching of L2 writing process with an emphasis on studying the writing conferences
Further research needs to be conducted to align how quality of L2 writing conferences have an impact on the quality of L2 students’ writing

26. Thank you!