Response Essay: English as a Second Language (ESL)

Introduction

English as a Second Language (ESL) writers as opposed to English as a First Language (EFL) writers face a lot of challenges in the America writing center. This is mainly contributed by the fact that the standards of English writing are significantly different from what most international students are used to. Often, there writing is underrated and they must consult tutors on various occasions for approval. The main methods of tutoring include non-directive and directive tutoring. The commonly used approach is non-directive which does not favor ESL writers. Thus, the paper focuses on Brian Riady's article on "A directive approach toward ESL/EFL writers" by giving responses on his perspective.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Body 1 (Summary: 70~100 words)

Brian Riady's article on "A directive approach toward ESL/EFL writers" addresses the issues faced by ESL students in the America writing centers. Brian argues that the commonly used approach of non-directive tutoring fails to meet the needs of international students who experience difficulty while writing (Riady, 2013). Also, the article highlights how language is greatly influenced by culture. In the article, Brian gives examples of Arabic and Japanese culture whose cultural roots are different from those of native English speaker in terms of style and what good writing involves. Furthermore, the article argues that non-directive consultations are best achieved when tutors communicate with EFL (Riady). Brian concludes by stated that ESL students will best write when both directive and non-directive approaches are utilized.

Body 2 (Response)

In the article Brian Riady argues that culture is a huge influencer when it comes to language development and nurturing. He supports his idea by giving examples of Arabic and Japanese culture whose languages have unique patterns of how writing is appreciated. Indeed, I fully support the author on this argument. Most ESL/EFL writing content is fully dependent on where they come. The native English speakers find it easy to meet the required standards of American writing center since they are familiar with the language patterns thus achieving flawless contents with no plagiarism. I agree with the author that the tutor is not supposed to point out too much grammar mistakes that ESL/EFL writers directly makes since this may end up hurting their self-confidence. However, much attention should be paid to some of the non-direct and direct approaches to teaching, rather than bringing a division to native and non-native English speakers.

On the other hand, the ESL writers are often faced by the challenge of disregarding their cultural language requirements and instead they have to adopt new cultural components regarding the English language. The process is cumbersome to ESL writers which slow down their performance in writing. Notably, the writer also encourages that student learning will be improved by making sure that direct instructions are minimized at the writing center in the United States. This will hence explain how culture defines writing and at the same time improve student learning from the Japanese and Arabic cultures. The author also points out some of the challenges that the current ESL writing center is facing; they put their major focus on the surface level error which student can realize and found them out nu themselves. His major drive is that writing center would be able to move deeper into the culture.

Body 3 (Response)

Another issue raised by the author is in the directive and non-directive tutoring approaches. He argues that the non-directive method is majorly successful when EFL writers make consultation with the tutors as they have common beliefs on what is regarded as "good writing". He proposes the implementation of the two approaches to ESL writers. In my opinion, this thought should be adopted by the American writing center in order to give non-natives an equal opportunity to succeed in the field.

The writer operates with the perception that nondirective approach is in place to make non-native English speakers not to be successful as a result of the loss of culture that is experienced by those native English speakers. From the writer's perspective, language forms part of the culture, so for the ESL writers, they work on putting their culture into English, however, they have to switch to the English style in case they want to become one of the experienced writers

The direct tutoring can help the ESL writers to best form an understanding of what their audience expects and the cultural aspect of what is considered to be good writing (Bailey). Nevertheless, the tutors should be considerate when administering the direct approach by ensuring they are not too demanding on perfection from ESL. This can potentially cause discouragement and esteem issues among ESL writers.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the writing centers across America must exploit all options when it comes to helping all their writers become good at what they do. The institutions should incorporate ways to meet the needs of both local and international writers by considering their different cultures. The shift should start by considering direct tutoring to be used by tutors on ESL writers. Moreover, the notion that using such an approach will be betraying non-directive tutoring should be eliminated for the greater good. Since there is a great need for creating more cultural awareness, there needs to be a paradigm shift in the habit of coming up with writing centers. However, Riady was wise enough to identify some of the challenges which could be experienced in adopting his concept.

Works Cited

RIADY, B. A Directive Approach toward ESL/EFL Writers. (2013)

Bailey, S. K. Tutor handbooks: Heuristic texts for negotiating difference in a globalized world. Praxis: A Writing Center Journal. (2012).