比較兩種寫作議論文繳交方式:電子郵件和線上寫作論壇

Abstract

近幾年來，由於諸多原因如網路的便利性、匿名文化、線上社群的廣泛使用，線上發表寫作的方式愈來愈受到歡迎。這股趨勢，從另一方面來說，卻引來關於線上言論自由權的後續關切，原因是線上作家認為他們可以憑藉匿名文化的隱蔽性，免於任何因在網路上不當發言而引來的控訴，這股議題引起相關研究人員莫大的關注，因此這些研究人員開始著手一些研究，但他們未能夠在研究裡凸顯線上寫作應有的正式、嚴謹的角色。 為了獲得學生在線上寫作環境及課堂寫作環境，兩者的行為表現和反應，學生必須把作業上傳到線上平台和私底下交給老師。學生的寫作會以下列面向和理論來分析，如借用Toulmin’s Model研究學生議論文組成的元素；利用功能語言學觀點，分析用特定字彙文法句型表達論點立場和舉例佐證的模式；用活動理論歸納學生寫作時運用的寫作策略。寫作步驟和字彙文法句型分析完後，會進行訪談，收集學生寫作時使用的寫作策略和使用原因。學生的寫作表現和心理效能之間的關聯，會利用自我寫作效能和寫作焦慮調查彼此相關性。 研究結果顯示學生的寫作元素不會因寫作環境的改變而產生很大的差異。字彙文法句型的研究結果則有些許的不同，學生用助動詞和功能連接詞表達論點立場時，在線上寫作環境呈現差異性。寫作策略研究結果共分成三個面向，其結果顯示學生在不同寫作環境時，呈現相似與差異之處。寫作焦慮和自我寫作效能研究結果，也透露兩者和學生實際寫作表現有所關聯。 本研究得出三個教學意涵。第一，學生提出議論論點時，須確保他們的觀點有立場依據，非憑空捏造，且他們使用的字眼也須盡可能保持客觀公正，因為線上公開的言論往往會遭他人用放大鏡來檢視，有的人甚至不懷好意。第二，提出立場相左的觀點，以及Toulmin模式中的其他元素，其重要性皆不容輕忽。老師可以利用詳細的說明和具體的舉證來引起學生對這些元素的注意，隨後老師可以進行實際演練讓學生動手練習。第三，學生由於自身過去的學習經驗，以為在英文寫作方面，文法的重要性大於寫作內容和組織架構，但事實上卻是相反，因此老師可用一些實例來重塑學生對於何謂好的英文寫作應有的信念。

In the recent years, online publication is increasing in popularity thanks to several reasons like the extreme convenience of Internet, features of anonymoity, and widespread use of online communities. On the other hand, this trend induces the subsequent concerns for the rights for freedom of speech online; that is, online writers suppose they can exempt themselves, for obscurity of pseudonym, from any accusation arising from any offensive words they leave in the cyberspace. This issue draws great concerns from researchers who accordingly have conducted several studies in which they, though, failed to highlight the formal position of what online writing should have. The purpose of this study was to gain a holistic picture of the way students behave and react between the two diverse writing environments, online and in-class, the research collected students’ homework submitted respectively to a forum and the instructor in class. Their writings were analyzed in terms of the following aspects and theoretical frameworks: (a) applied moves (e.g., claim and data) by Toulmin’s Model, (b) lexcial-lignuistic patterns for realizing stance-taking and stance-supporting by Functional Linguistics, (c) writing strategies by Activity Theory. Interviews were conducted after the first two analysis were completed. Interview questions were aimed to elicit those applied writing strategies and reasons. The survey on self-efficacy and writing apprehension was also used to investigate the relationship between students’ performances and fluctuation of affective condition. The findings suggested there were no remarkable differences between online writing and in-class writing in terms of the applied moves. The results for lexical-grammatical patterns demonstrated differences that modal adjunct and functional conjunction are applied as students express their position in forum, yet not in in-class writing. The results of writing strategies were categoized into three dimensions which revealed similarities and dissimilarities of how they perform in different writing environments. Writing apprehension and self-efficacy also disclosed certain connection to each other and students’ actual performance. Three pedagogical implications were extended from the present study. First, student writers need to assure what they claim is sturdily supported with hard evidence and the words they select are as unbiased and objective as they can be. The publications online are likely to be scrutinized with critical and even malicious way. Second, the importance of counterargument and other Toulmin’s elements should not be underestimated. Teachers could specifically draw their attention to these elements with detailed elaboration and concrete enumeration, which are followed by hand-on practice. Third, students suppose that grammar more of value than content and organization, which primarily arises from their past learning experience, and in fact it is the other way around. Thus, teachers could remold their belief in what a good writing is supposed to be with more real-life examples.