First Language Reflection on Second Language Writing: Impact and Implications

Abstract

In New Zealand’s high-stakes school assessment system, the National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA), foreign language writing skills are measured in internally assessed portfolios which comprise texts in the target language set and marked by the teacher. Because the writing is typically collected over time, and feedback can be given, portfolio assessment offers students the opportunity to reflect on their progress. However, in a crowded curriculum where time is tight, teachers tend to omit unassessed components, such as reflection, from their programmes. This thesis details a mixed method, counter-balanced, comparative study that investigated whether the omission or inclusion of a dedicated reflection component in assessment portfolios makes a difference to students’ writing performance and language learning. The study was conducted in five secondary school French as Foreign Language classrooms. It addressed the question of the potential impact of reflection by measuring and comparing the learning gains in the second language (L2) writing of the 71 Year 11 participants when they reflected and when they did not. It also sought insights from the first language (L1) reflections in terms of language learner strategies and self-regulation. For the purposes of analysis, the participants, who were already placed in intact classes by their schools, were also placed for closer research analysis into three pre-test groups, Achieved, Merit or Excellence1, using an adapted NCEA rubric. Using both quantitative and qualitative tools to analyse the L2 data collected, the research found that the Task 1 Merit intervention participants appeared to benefit from the reflection intervention with a statistically significant gain in L2 written proficiency and L2 accuracy, but not in complexity, fluency, verb error elimination or verb self-regulation. The L1 reflections were also analysed using quantitative and qualitative tools. The research found a strong correlation between the participants’ L2 achievement levels and the effectiveness of the strategic and self-regulatory practices that they reported using. Previous scholarship has found that different language features develop at different rates for different students, and that, when strategies are taught, achievement levels rise. It is possible, therefore, that providing the students with the time and support they needed to reflect in their L1 as they wrote for L2 portfolio assessment focussed their attention in a such a way that language learning increased for those students who were at a point in their Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) where they were ready to take next steps in interlanguage development related to L2 written proficiency and accuracy. It seems that they needed more explicit support, in addition to reflection, before being able to develop other language features. For other participants, however, there were no statistically significant shifts. It is possible that, if the research had continued for a longer period and included regular opportunities for developing a habit of reflection, all students might have benefitted with increased or accelerated learning gains and that this learning might have included other language features in addition to L2 written proficiency and accuracy. It is important to note that the L1 reflections provided data on individual learning that had the potential to inform teaching practice. They also provided an opportunity for students to converse with the teacher in such a way that productive learning relationships were able to develop. As a consequence of the analysis of the L1 and L2 data, this study draws attention to the strong links between Assessment for Learning, writing to learn language and reflective self-regulatory practices.