This article investigates the effect of concept-based instruction (CBI), a pedagogy based on Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory, on second language (L2) learners’ writing development. A quasi-experimental intervention lasting 16 weeks was conducted involving 88 first-year Chinese university students of English. The participants were assigned to three conditions: Full CBI (F-CBI) treatment, Partial CBI (P-CBI) treatment (i.e. CBI without peer–peer talk) and control. A definition task and two writing tasks (a narrative and an argumentative task) were used to measure students’ knowledge and understanding of genre and their writing performance, respectively. The results indicated that the F-CBI intervention generated significantly larger gains in learners’ understanding of genre as well as their overall writing performance than did the control group. In addition, a significant difference was also observed between the F-CBI group and the P-CBI group in the definition task and the argumentative task, which further suggests that peer–peer talk plays a crucial role in enhancing learners’ conceptual development. This study highlights the feasibility and effectiveness of integrating CBI in L2 writing instruction and the importance of engaging learners to talk through their understanding and use of concepts in the classroom. Theoretical contributions to Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory of mind are also discussed.
AhnH. (2012). Teaching writing skills based on a genre approach to L2 primary school students: An action research. English Language Teaching, 5, 2–16.
2.
BawarshiA.S.ReiffM.J. (2010). Genre: An introduction to history, theory, research, and pedagogy. Parlor Press.
3.
BrooksL.KnouziI.LapkinS.SwainM. (2010). Mediating between scientific and spontaneous concepts through languaging. Language Awareness, 19, 89–110.
4.
BuacM.KaushanskayaM. (2014). The relationship between linguistic and non-linguistic cognitive control skills in bilingual children from low socio-economic backgrounds. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1098.
5.
BuescherK. (2015). Developing second language narrative literacy using concept-based instruction and a division-of-labor pedagogy. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA, USA.
6.
BuescherK. (2018). A sociocultural approach to second language literacy pedagogy. In LantolfJ.PoehnerM.SwainM. (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of sociocultural theory and second language development (pp. 378–388). Routledge.
7.
ByrnesH. (2009). Emergent L2 German writing ability in a curricular context: A longitudinal study of grammatical metaphor. Linguistics and Education, 20, 50–66.
8.
ByrnesH.MaximH.H.NorrisJ.M. (2010). Realizing advanced foreign language writing development in collegiate education: Curricular design, pedagogy, assessment. The Modern Language Journal, 94, i–235. Issue supplement.
9.
CullipP. (2009). A tale of two texts: Tracking developments in learner writing. RELC Journal, 40, 192–210.
10.
CummingA. (2016). Theoretical orientations to L2 writing. In ManchónR.MatsudaP.K. (Eds.), Handbook of second and foreign language writing (pp. 65–88). De Gruyter.
11.
DavydovV. (2004). Problems of developmental instruction: A theoretical and experimental psychological study. Akademiya.
12.
de OliveiraL.C.LanS.-W. (2014). Writing science in an upper elementary classroom: A genre-based approach to teaching English language learners. Journal of Second Language Writing, 25, 23–39.
13.
EllisR. (2012). Language teaching research and language pedagogy. Wiley-Blackwell.
14.
EmiliaE.HamiedF.A. (2015). Systemic functional linguistic genre pedagogy (SFL GP) in a tertiary EFL writing context in Indonesia. TEFLIN Journal, 26, 155–182.
15.
FazilatfarA.M.JabbariA.A.HarsijR. (2017). Concept-Based Instruction on teaching English tense and aspect to Iranian school learners. Issues in Language Teaching, 6, 145–179.
16.
FerreiraM.LantolfJ.P. (2008). A concept-based approach to teaching writing through genre analysis. In LantolfJ.PoehnerM. (Eds.), Sociocultural theory and the teaching of second languages (pp. 189–227). Equinox.
17.
FieldA. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS. 3rd edition.Sage.
18.
FieldA.MilesJ.FieldZ. (2012). Discovering statistics using R. 1st edition. Sage.
19.
FogalG.G. (2017). Developing concept-based instruction, pedagogical content knowledge: Implications for teacher educators and L2 instructors. Language and Sociocultural Theory, 4, 53–75.
20.
FogalG.G. (2019). Tracking microgenetic changes in authorial voice development from a complexity theory perspective. Applied Linguistics, 40, 432–455.
21.
FreedmanA.MedwayP. (1994). Locating genre studies: Antecedents and prospects. In FreedmanA.MedwayP. (Eds.), Genre and the new rhetoric (pp. 1–20). Taylor and Francis.
22.
Gal’perinP. (1989). Mental actions as a basis for the formation of thoughts and images. Soviet Psychology, 27, 45–64.
23.
Gal’perinP. (1992). Stage-by-stage formation as a method of psychological investigation. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 30, 60–80.
24.
Gánem-GutiérrezG.A.HarunH. (2011). Verbalisation as a mediational tool for understanding tense-aspect marking in English: An application of concept-based instruction. Language Awareness, 20, 99–119.
25.
HaenenJ. (2001). Outlining the teaching–learning process: Piotr Gal’perin’s contribution. Learning and Instruction, 11, 157–170.
26.
HallidayM.A.K.MatthiessenC.M.I. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar. Routledge.
27.
HylandK. (2004). Genre and second language writing. University of Michigan Press.
28.
HylandK. (2007). Genre pedagogy: Language, literacy and L2 writing instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16, 148–164.
29.
JohnsA.M. (2003). Genre and ESL/EFL composition instruction. In KrollB. (Ed.), Exploring the dynamics of second language writing (pp. 195–217). Cambridge University Press.
30.
JohnsA.M. (2011). The future of genre in L2 writing: Fundamental, but contested, instructional decisions. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20, 56–68.
31.
KaoY. (2017). Developing Chinese rhetorical awareness through concept-based instruction: A case study on second language learners. Language and Sociocultural Theory, 4, 156–186.
32.
KimJ.LantolfJ.P. (2018). Developing conceptual understanding of sarcasm in L2 English through explicit instruction. Language Teaching Research, 22, 208–229.
33.
Kinard SrJ.T.KozulinA. (2008). Rigorous mathematical thinking. Conceptual formation in the mathematics classroom. Cambridge University Press.
34.
KirkR. (1996). Practical significance: A concept whose time has come. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56, 746–759.
35.
LantolfJ.P.PoehnerM.E. (2014). Sociocultural theory and the pedagogical imperative in L2 education: Vygotskian praxis and the research/practice divide. Routledge.
36.
LeeM.EvansM. (2019). Investigating the operating mechanisms of the sources of L2 writing self-efficacy at the stages of giving and receiving peer feedback. The Modern Language Journal, 103, 831–847.
37.
LuX. (2010). Automatic analysis of syntactic complexity in second language writing. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 15, 474–496.
38.
LuriaA. (1976). Cognitive development: Its cultural and social foundations. Harvard University Press.
39.
MacbethK.P. (2009). Deliberate false provisions: The use and usefulness of models in learning academic writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19, 33–48.
40.
Macken-HorarikM. (2002). ‘Something to shoot for’: A systemic functional approach to teaching genre in secondary school. In JohnsA. (Ed.), Genre in the classroom: Multiple perspectives (pp. 17–42). Erlbaum.
41.
ManchónR. (Ed.). (2012). L2 writing development: Multiple perspectives. De Gruyter.
42.
MartinJ. (1993). Genre and literacy: Modeling context in educational linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 13, 141–172.
43.
MartinJ. (2009). Genre and language learning: A social semiotic perspective. Linguistics and Education, 20, 10–21.
44.
MartinJ.RoseD. (2007). Interacting with text: The role of dialogue in learning to read and write. Foreign Languages in China, 4, 66–80
45.
MartinJ.WhiteP.R.R. (2005). The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. Palgrave Macmillan.
46.
NassajiH.SwainM. (2000). A Vygotskian perspective on corrective feedback in L2: The effect of random versus negotiated help on the learning of English articles. Language Awareness, 9, 34–51.
47.
NegueruelaE. (2003). A sociocultural approach to teaching and researching second languages: Systemic-theoretical instruction and second language development. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA, USA.
48.
NegueruelaE. (2008). Revolutionary pedagogies: Learning that leads to second language development. In LantolfJ.PoehnerM. (Eds.), Sociocultural theory and the teaching of second languages (pp. 189–227). Equinox.
49.
NegueruelaE.GarcíaP.N.BuescherK. (2015). From interaction to intra-action: The internalization of talk, gesture, and concepts in the second language classroom. In MarkeeN. (Ed.), The handbook of classroom discourse and interaction (pp. 233–249). John Wiley.
50.
OhtaA.S. (2017). From SCOBA development to implementation in concept-based instruction: Conceptualizing and teaching Japanese addressee honorifics as expressing modes of self. Language and Sociocultural Theory, 4, 187–218.
51.
OrtegaL. (2003). Syntactic complexity measures and their relationship to L2 proficiency: A Research synthesis of college-level L2 writing. Applied Linguistics, 24, 492–518.
52.
PituchK.A.StevensJ.P. (2015). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences: Analyses with SAS and IBM’s SPSS. Routledge.
53.
PlonskyL.OswaldF.L. (2014). How big is ‘big’? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64, 878–912.
54.
PolioC.G. (1997). Measures of linguistic accuracy in second language writing research. Language Learning, 47, 101–143.
55.
RiveraJ. (2014). Second Language (L2) development as concept-mediated textual activity: Exploring the role of functional language concepts in classroom L2 communication and learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
56.
RoseD.MartinJ. (2012). Learning to write, reading to learn: Genre, knowledge and pedagogy in the Sydney school. Equinox.
57.
RotheryJ.StenglinM. (1994). Writing a book review: A unit of work for junior secondary English (Write it right resources for literacy and learning). Metropolitan East Disadvantaged Schools Programme.
58.
Serrano-LopezM.PoehnerM. (2008). Materializing linguistic concepts through 3-D clay modelling: A tool-and-result approach to mediating L2 Spanish development. In LantolfJ.PoehnerM. (Eds.), Sociocultural theory and the teaching of second languages (pp. 321–348). Equinox.
59.
SilvaT. (1990). Second language composition instruction: Developments, issues, and directions in ESL. In KrollB. (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 11–13). Cambridge University Press.
60.
StorchN. (2013). Collaborative writing in L2 classrooms. Multilingual Matters.
61.
SuzukiW. (2012). Written languaging, direct correction, and second language writing revision. Language Learning, 62, 1110–1133.
62.
SwainM. (2006). Languaging, agency and collaboration in advanced language proficiency. In ByrnsH. (Ed.), Advanced language learning: The contribution of Halliday and Vygotsky (pp. 95–108). Continuum.
63.
SwainM.LapkinS. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. The Modern Language Journal, 82, 320–337.
64.
SwainM.LapkinS. (2000). Task-based second language learning: The uses of the first language. Language Teaching Research, 4, 251–274.
65.
SwainM.BrooksL.Tocalli-BellerA. (2002). Peer–peer dialogue as a means of second language learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 171–185
66.
SwainM.LapkinS.KnouziI.SuzukiW. (2009). Languaging: University students learn the grammatical concept of voice in French. Modern Language Journal, 93, 5–29.
67.
SwalesJ.M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Press.
68.
TardyC.M. (2009). Building genre knowledge. Parlor Press.
69.
TsaiM.H. (2020). The effects of explicit instruction on L2 learners’ acquisition of verb–noun collocations. Language Teaching Research, 24, 138–162.
70.
TulvisteP. (1991). The Cultural-historical development of verbal thinking. Nova Science.
71.
van CompernolleR.A. (2014). Sociocultural theory and L2 instructional pragmatics. Multilingual Matters.
72.
van CompernolleR.A.HeneryA. (2014). Instructed concept appropriation and L2 pragmatic development in the classroom. Language Learning, 64, 549–578.
73.
VygotskyL.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
74.
VygotskyL.S. (1986). Thought and language. The MIT Press.
75.
WatanabeY.SwainM. (2007). Effects of proficiency differences and patterns of pair interaction on second language learning: Collaborative dialogue between adult ESL learners. Language Teaching Research, 11, 121–142.
76.
WhiteB.J. (2012). A conceptual approach to the instruction of phrasal verbs. The Modern Language Journal, 96, 419–438.
77.
WigglesworthG.StorchN. (2012). What role for collaboration in writing and writing feedback?Journal of Second Language Writing, 21, 364–374.
WilliamsL.AbrahamL.B.NegueruelaE. (2013). Using concept-based instruction in the L2 classroom: Perspectives from current and future language teachers. Language Teaching Research, 17, 363–381.
80.
Wolf-QuinteroK.InagakiS.KimH. (1998). Second language development in writing: Measures of fluency, accuracy, and complexity. University of Hawaii Press.
81.
Yáñez-PrietoM. (2010). Authentic instruction in literary worlds: Learning the stylistics of concept-based grammar. Language and Literature, 19, 59–75.
