"Completely Different Worlds": EAP and the Writing Experiences of ESL Students in University Courses

TLDR

Student experiences in EAP writing courses are underexplored, yet surveys show ESL learners interpret texts differently based on source type, and understanding their perceived meanings is essential for effective instruction. The study examines how ESL students experience writing under different source conditions in EAP and content courses using interview data. The authors conducted interviews with ESL students to capture their experiences across EAP and content courses under various source conditions. The study finds that EAP writing courses rarely require students to demonstrate knowledge of source texts, and that excluding source texts or responsibility for them limits opportunities for linguistic and intellectual growth.

Abstract

One source of information that should inform decisions about English for academic purposes (EAP) writing courses is students' experiences in those courses and beyond. A survey of ESL students in the U.S. (Leki & Carson, 1994) has indicated that they experience writing differently depending on the source of information drawn on in writing a text: general world knowledge or personal experience; a source text or texts used as a springboard for ideas; or a source text (or other external reality), the content of which the student must display knowledge. This article, based on interview data, reports on how ESL students experience writing under each of these conditions in their EAP writing classes and their academic content classes across the curriculum. The findings suggest that writing classes require students to demonstrate knowledge of a source text much less frequently than other academic courses do. We argue that EAP classes that limit students to writing without source texts or to writing without responsibility for the content of source texts miss the opportunity to engage L2 writing students in the kinds of interactions with text that promote linguistic and intellectual growth. To explain and understand any human social behavior … we need to know the meaning attached to it by the participants themselves. (Nielsen, 1990)