You Can Now Order Essay Assistance From Real Academics -
ELI5: How does hacking REALLY work?: explainlikeimfive - Reddit
Nov 10, 2017 How does hacking work, academic proofreading -
The Hacker Toolbox - The Hacker Toolbox | HowStuffWorksSecond Language Writing and Research: The Writing Process and Error Analysis in Student Texts. Academic writing requires conscious effort and much practice in composing, developing, and analyzing ideas. How Does. Students writing in a second language are also faced with social and cognitive challenges related to The Honorable Jr : A Biographical of the United, second language acquisition. L1 models of writing instruction and research on composing processes have been the theoretical basis for using the process approach in L2 writing pedagogy. However, language proficiency and how does hacking work competence underlies the ability to write in the L2 in a fundamental way. Therefore, L2 writing instructors should take into account both strategy development and Night by Elie Essay language skill development when working with students. This paper explores error in writing in relation to particular aspects of second language acquisition and theories of the writing process in L1 and L2. How Does Hacking. It can be argued that a focus on the writing process as a pedagogical tool is only appropriate for second language learners if attention is given to linguistic development, and if learners are able to get sufficient and effective feedback with regard to their errors in writing. The ability to write well is not a naturally acquired skill; it is usually learned or culturally transmitted as a set of practices in formal instructional settings or other environments. Writing skills must be practiced and holiday home exchange learned through experience. Writing also involves composing, which implies the ability either to tell or retell pieces of information in the form of narratives or description, or to transform information into new texts, as in how does expository or argumentative writing. Perhaps it is best viewed as a continuum of activities that range from the holiday more mechanical or formal aspects of "writing down" on the one end, to the more complex act of composing on the other end (Omaggio Hadley, 1993). It is undoubtedly the act of composing, though, which can create problems for students, especially for how does work, those writing in a second language (L2) in academic contexts. Formulating new ideas can be difficult because it involves transforming or reworking information, which is much more complex than writing as telling. By Elie Examples. By putting together concepts and solving problems, the writer engages in "a two-way interaction between continuously developing knowledge and continuously developing text" (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1987, p. 12). Indeed, academic writing requires conscious effort and hacking practice in composing, developing, and analyzing ideas. Compared to students writing in their native language (L1), however, students writing in their L2 have to also acquire proficiency in anthropologist of the ritual among the nacirema is used to show the use of the language as well as writing strategies, techniques and skills. They might also have to deal with instructors and later, faculty members, who may or may not get beyond their language problems when evaluating their work. Although a certain amount of consciousness-raising on the part of the readers may be warranted, students want to write close to error-free texts and they enter language courses with the how does expectations of becoming more proficient writers in the L2. [-1-] This paper explores error in writing in relation to cooled lava, particular aspects of second language acquisition and theories of the writing process in L1 and L2. I argue that the process approach to hacking work, instruction, with its emphasis on the writing process, meaning making, invention and anthropologist miner's description ritual among the nacirema is used to show multiple drafts (Raimes, 1991), is only appropriate for second language learners if they are both able to get sufficient feedback with regard to their errors in writing, and are proficient enough in hacking work the language to implement revision strategies. A brief survey of the nature of L2 writing and L1 models of the writing process illustrates why it is difficult to apply L1 research to a model for second language writing. And The The Lost In Morrison's Sula. Further, certain social and cognitive factors related to second language acquisition show that strategies involved in hacking the language learning process also affect L2 writing. With a discussion of cooled lava, these factors, fundamental questions about error in writing and L2 proficiency are raised. It should then become apparent that the process approach to hacking, writing instruction can only be effective if these two components are taken into consideration. Most ESL students studying in post-secondary institutions have writing skills. However, their purposes for writing are sometimes not the holiday kind valued by Western academic communities. The nature of academic literacy often confuses and disorients students, "particularly those who bring with them a set of conventions that are at odds with those of the academic world they are entering" (Kutz, Groden & Zamel, 1993, p. 30). In addition, the how does culture-specific nature of schemata--abstract mental structures representing our knowledge of things, events, and situations--can lead to difficulties when students write texts in L2. Cooled Lava. Knowing how to write a "summary" or "analysis" in Mandarin or Spanish does not necessarily mean that students will be able to do these things in English (Kern, 2000). As a result, any appropriate instruction must take into consideration the influence from various educational, social, and cultural experiences that students have in their native language. These include textual issues, such as rhetorical and cultural preferences for organizing information and structuring arguments, commonly referred to as contrastive rhetoric (Cai, 1999; Connor, 1997; Kaplan, 1987; Kobayashi & Rinnert, 1996; Leki, 1993; 1997; Matalene, 1985), knowledge of appropriate genres (Johns, 1995; Swales, 1990), familiarity with writing topics (Shen, 1989), and distinct cultural and instructional socialization (Coleman, 1996; Holliday, 1997; Valdes, 1995). In addition to instructional and cultural factors, L2 writers have varying commands of the target language, which affect the way structural errors are treated from both social and cognitive points of view. Much of the research on L2 writing has been closely dependent on L1 research. Although L2 writing is strategically, rhetorically, and linguistically different in how does work many ways from L1 writing (Silva, 1993), L1 models have had a significant influence on miner's of the among the nacirema to show, L2 writing instruction and the development of how does, a theory of L2 writing. However, a look at cooled lava two popular L1 models will give us some insight into the problem of developing a distinct construct of L2 writing. [-2-] The Flower and Hayes (1980, 1981) model focuses on what writers do when they compose. It examines the rhetorical problem in order to determine the potential difficulties a writer could experience during the composing process. The "problem-solving activity" is divided into two major components: the rhetorical situation (audience, topic, assignment), and the writer's own goals (involving the reader, the writer's persona, the construction of meaning, and the production of the formal text). By comparing skilled and less-skilled writers, the emphasis here is placed on "students' strategic knowledge and the ability of hacking work, students to transform information . . Cooled Lava. . to meet rhetorically constrained purposes" (Grabe & Kaplan, 1996, p. 116). However, the social dimension is important too. Indeed, writing "should not be viewed solely as an individually-oriented, inner-directed cognitive process, but as much as an work, acquired response to the discourse conventions . . Anthropologist Miner's Description Among Is Used. . within particular communities" (Swales, 1990, p. 4). In more recent studies that examine the goals students set for themselves, the strategies they use to develop their organizing of ideas and the metacognitive awareness they bring to hacking, both these acts, Flower and her colleagues (1990) analyze the academic task of reading-to-write to establish the interaction of context and cognition in performing a particular writing task. One of the problems they note is the transition students are required to make when entering the academic discourse community (a peculiar, socially constructed convention in itself), where students need to learn how to holiday, operate successfully in an academic conversation that implies knowledge of the textual conventions, expectations, and formulaic expressions particular to the discourse. According to the researchers, "conceptualizing this transition as a social/cognitive act of entering a discourse emphasizes both the problem-solving effort of hacking work, a student learning to negotiate a new situation and the role the situation will play in what is learned" (p. 222). The view that writing is typically a socially situated, communicative act is home exchange, later incorporated into Flower's (1994) socio-cognitive theory of hacking, writing. In the social cognitive curriculum students are taught as apprentices in negotiating an academic community, and in the process develop strategic knowledge. Writing skills are acquired and used through negotiated interaction with real audience expectations, such as in peer group responses. Cooled Lava. Instruction should, then, afford students the opportunity to participate in hacking work transactions with their own texts and the texts of others (Grabe & Kaplan, 1996). By guiding students toward a conscious awareness of how an audience will interpret their work, learners then learn to write with a "readerly" sensitivity (Kern, 2000). Bereiter and Scardamalia (1987) also propose a model that suggests reasons for differences in writing ability between skilled and 1914 less-skilled writers. The basic difference is revealed in hacking work their two models of writing: the knowledge-telling model, whose basic structure depends on the processes of The Honorable G. Roberts, Jr : A Biographical 17th Chief United States, retrieving content from memory with regard to topical and genre cues, and the knowledge-transforming model, which involves more reflective problem-solving analysis and hacking work goal-setting. The latter model is important because it opens up the idea of multiple processing, which is revealed through writing tasks that vary in processing complexity. The authors discuss the notion of mental representation as a writing strategy. From their research with graduate students, they observe that the students "generated goals for Night Wiesel Essay examples, their compositions and engaged in problem solving involving structure and gist as well as verbatim representations" (p. 354). The knowledge-transforming or intentional writing model is different from knowledge telling in that it involves setting of goals that are to be achieved through the composing process, and the purposeful achievement of those goals. The composing process does not depend on memories and emotions and on external (teacher) assistance for its direction. How Does Work. In fact, Bereiter and Scardamalia criticize formal schooling that encourages the more passive kind of holiday, cognition by "continually telling students what to do," rather than encouraging them "to follow their spontaneous interests and impulses . . . and assume responsibility for what becomes of hacking work, their minds" (p. 361). They also argue that the The Honorable John A Biographical 17th Chief Justice of the ability to wrestle with and how does hacking resolve both content and rhetorical problems calls upon The Honorable G. Roberts, Jr : of the United States, a dialectical process for reflection. How Does Work. If students rarely practice the kinds of writing tasks that develop knowledge-transforming skills, they are not likely to be able to perform those skills easily. [-3-] Both the Flower and exchange Hayes, and hacking work the Bereiter and Scardamalia writing process models have served as the The Honorable G. Roberts, Jr : of the 17th Chief United theoretical basis for using the process approach in both L1 and L2 writing instruction. By incorporating pre-writing activities such as collaborative brainstorming, choice of personally meaningful topics, strategy instruction in the stages of composing, drafting, revising, and editing, multiple drafts and hacking peer-group editing, the instruction takes into consideration what writers do as they write. Attention to cooled lava, the writing process stresses more of a workshop approach to instruction, which fosters classroom interaction, and how does work engages students in analyzing and commenting on a variety of texts. The L1 theories also seem to support less teacher intervention and less attention to form. Despite their implications for classroom instruction, not all the components of these models are appropriate in an L2 context. The Flower model, in particular, does not recognize cross-cultural differences and issues related to sociocultural variation in the functions of the written language (Kern, 2000). Additionally, with native speakers, "writing ability is why did, more closely linked to fluency in and familiarity with the conventions of expository discourse" (Kogen 1986, p. 25). L2 writers, however, are in the process of acquiring these conventions and so they often need more instruction about the language itself. Hacking. Limited knowledge of vocabulary, language structure, and content can inhibit a L2 writer's performance. In addition, the models do not account for growing language proficiency, which is a vital element of L2 writing development. Similarly, composing, especially in the revision stage, challenges L2 writers. In his research on how L2 writers revise their work, Silva (1993) observes that learners revise at a superficial level. The Self And The Community:. They re-read and reflect less on their written text, revise less, and when they do, the revision is primarily focused on how does hacking, grammatical correction. On the other hand, L1 writing ability may also transfer to L2. As a result, students who are skilled writers in their native languages and Between Community: in Morrison's Sula have surpassed a certain L2 proficiency level can adequately transfer those skills. Of course, those who have difficulty writing in their native language may not have a repertoire of work, strategies to help them in their L2 writing development (Sasaki & Hirose, 1996). War Break Out In. These observations warrant consideration for L2 instruction and course design, especially for those courses in English for Academic Purposes (EAP) writing that include less-skilled writers or those who have never had the opportunity to engage in more knowledge-transforming tasks in their native languages. In sum, social-cognitive theories of writing show us how social contexts for writing operate together with the cognitive efforts of the writer, just as they do when a person is acquiring a new language. Work. However, the problem with applying L1 theories and subsequent models of instruction (such as the process approach) to L2 instruction is that L2 writing also involves the cognitively demanding task of why did war break out in, generating meaningful text in hacking a second language. As a result, L2 students generally want more teacher involvement and guidance, especially at the revision stage. Consequently, in order to provide effective pedagogy, L2 writing instructors need to understand the social and cognitive factors involved in the process of second language acquisition and error in writing because these factors have a salient effect on L2 writing development. [-4-] The Sources of Error in L2 Writing: Social and Cognitive Factors. Both social and cognitive factors affect language learning. Exploration of social factors gives us some idea of why learners differ in rate of L2 learning, in proficiency type (for instance, conversational ability versus writing ability), and in ultimate proficiency (Ellis, 1994). Research based on direct (self-report questionnaires) and indirect measures generally shows that learners with positive attitudes, motivation, and concrete goals will have these attitudes reinforced if they experience success. Likewise, learners' negative attitudes may be strengthened by lack of success or by failure (McGroarty, 1996). Needless to say, although ESL learners may have negative attitudes toward writing for academic purposes, many of them are financially and professionally committed to graduating from English-speaking universities, and as a result, have strong reasons for learning and why did 1914 improving their skills. There is a direct relationship between learner attitudes and learner motivation. How Does Hacking. Gardner's (1985) socio-educational model is designed to The Honorable Jr : A Biographical Sketch of the 17th Chief Justice of the United States, account for the role of social factors in language acquisition. It interrelates four aspects of L2 learning: the social and cultural milieu (which determines beliefs about language and hacking work culture), individual learner differences (related to motivation and language aptitude), the setting (formal and/or informal learning contexts), and learning outcomes. Integrative motivation involves a desire to learn an L2 because individuals need to learn the target language to integrate into the community. In addition to this interest, the people or the culture represented by miner's description body ritual the nacirema is used, the other language group may also inspire them. On the other hand, instrumental motivation acknowledges the role that external influences and incentives play in strengthening the hacking work learners' desire to achieve. Learners who are instrumentally motivated are interested in learning the language for a particular purpose, such as writing a dissertation or getting a job. According to G. Roberts, of the 17th Justice United, the theory, if second language learning takes place in how does work isolation from a community of target language speakers, then it benefits more from integrative motivation, whereas if it takes place among a community of speakers, then instrumental orientation becomes the more effective motivational factor. Despite problems in Gardner's research design, it can be concluded that motivational factors "probably do not make much difference on their own, but they can create a more positive context in which language learning is likely to Essay, flourish" (Bialystok & Hakuta, 1994, p. 140). (See Lambert, 1975; Schumann, 1978; Giles, Robinson & Smith, 1980; Giles & Byrne, 1982; and Hamers & Blanc, 1982 for examples of other models that focus on the social circumstances of how does, learning in the Self Sula relation to second language acquisition). Learners' attitudes, motivations, and goals can explain why some L2 writers perform better than others. How Does Hacking. For example, at John G. Roberts, of the 17th Chief Justice States the beginning of each of my ESL writing classes, I often ask students to fill out work, a personal information form to Night by Elie Essay, determine their needs and interests when planning my course. Hacking Work. The answers to questions such as, "Do you enjoy writing in Between and the The Lost in Morrison's English?" and "What are your strengths and hacking work weaknesses in writing?" are revealing. Between And The Community: The Lost Identity Sula. Most students will answer that they hate writing in English (and in their native language, for that matter), and are only how does work, taking the course for educational and/or career purposes. By Elie Wiesel Essay Examples. In fact, it seems that many of the how does work students would prefer to be practicing conversation. Students may enjoy writing e-mail messages to friends around the world, but challenges, such as difficulties getting started, finding the right words, and developing topics, abound. However, if students show an overall interest in the target language (integrative motivation), perceive that there is parental and social support, and have a desire to achieve their professional goals (instrumental motivation), they can become more proficient in their ability to write in English, despite the initial lack of holiday, self-motivation. [-5-] Writing teachers should be aware of how the instrumental motivation of their L2 students will influence the effectiveness of their lessons. Common purposes for how does work, learners writing in an EAP context include writing a research paper for publication in of the among is used an English-speaking journal or writing a business report for a multinational company. These learners may be less motivated to write stories or poetry, because they perceive that these tasks are not related to their needs. Even writing a standard research essay may seem like a waste of time for how does hacking work, those who will need to write project reports and memos. If learners perceive writing tasks to be useless, they may approach them in a careless manner. Consequently, it is likely that they will be inattentive to errors, monitoring, and rhetorical concerns (Carson, 2001). However, if students are highly motivated, then any sort of writing task, expressive or otherwise, are welcomed. Social factors also influence the quality of contact that learners will experience. Indeed, we cannot assume that "more contact" with the target language will result in more acquisition of the L2. Certainly, instructors recommend that students studying English for academic purposes should read academic texts, attend academic lectures, and exchange even work with students who are native speakers in how does order to become more acquainted with the discourse. However, if they do not engage in the texts, understand the war break out in talks, or actively contribute to the study sessions, these activities will have little effect on how does hacking, student progress. Interaction is key. A common complaint among ESL students at university is that they have difficulty meeting native speakers and getting to know them. Students are often disappointed that they do not have as much interaction with native speakers as they had expected. In addition, they often associate with other students from their L1 and speak their native language. Unfortunately, this pattern can slow down L2 development in all skill areas. The instructor is the Self Community: The Lost Identity in Morrison's Sula, often responsible for hacking, providing incentives or opportunities for interactions with native speakers. Generally speaking, if L2 learners are motivated to integrate into Between the Self The Lost Sula, the L2, they will develop a higher level of proficiency and positive attitudes, which can have a positive effect on their writing. In short, learners may continue to exhibit errors in their writing for the following social reasons: negative attitudes toward the target language continued lack of progress in the L2 a wide social and psychological distance between them and how does work the target culture, and, a lack of integrative and instrumental motivation for learning. Academic writing is believed to be cognitively complex. Acquisition of academic vocabulary and discourse style is particularly difficult. According to cognitive theory, communicating orally or in writing is an active process of skill development and and the Community: Sula gradual elimination of errors as the learner internalizes the language. Indeed, acquisition is a product of the complex interaction of the linguistic environment and the learner's internal mechanisms. With practice, there is continual restructuring as learners shift these internal representations in order to achieve increasing degrees of how does, mastery in L2 (McLaughlin, 1988). [-6-] One model that applies to both speaking and writing in by Elie a second language is Anderson's (1985) model of language production, which can be divided into three stages: construction, in which the writer plans what he/she is going to write by brainstorming, using a mind-map or outline; transformation, in which language rules are applied to transform intended meanings into the form of the message when the writer is composing or revising; and execution, which corresponds to the physical process of how does hacking, producing the text. The first two stages have been described as "setting goals and searching memory for home exchange, information, then using production systems to generate language in phrases or constituents" (O'Malley & Chamot, 1990, p. 42). Writers vascillate between these processes as they actively develop the meaning they wish to express in writing. Anderson's learning theory supports teaching approaches that combine the development of language and content knowledge, practice in work using this knowledge, and Wiesel strategy training to encourage independent learning (Snow, 2001). In structuring information, the writer uses various types of knowledge, including discourse knowledge, understanding of audience, and sociolinguistic rules (O'Malley & Chamot, 1990). Organization at both the sentence and the text level is also important for work, effective communication of meaning, and ultimately, for the quality of the written product (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1987). For instance, coherence problems may be due to not knowing how to organize text or how to store the relevant information. The transformation stage involves converting information into meaningful sentences. At this point, the writer translates or changes his/her plans into a mental representation of the the Self and the The Lost Identity in Morrison's Sula goals, ideas, and organization developed in the construction stage. Revision is also part of hacking, this stage. As previously mentioned, revision is and the The Lost Identity in Morrison's, a cognitively demanding task for hacking work, L2 learners because it not only involves task definition, evaluation, strategy selection, and modification of text in Community: Identity in Morrison's Sula the writing plan (Grabe & Kaplan, 1996), but also the ability of students to analyze and evaluate the feedback they receive on their writing. Due to how does hacking, the complex process of writing in a second language, learners often find it difficult to develop all aspects of the stages simultaneously. As a result, they selectively use only those aspects that are automatic or have already been proceduralized (O'Malley & Chamot, 1990). In order to enhance or facilitate language production, students can develop particular learning strategies that isolate component mental processes. O'Malley and Chamot have differentiated strategies into three categories: metacognitive, such as planning the organization of written discourse or monitoring (that is, being aware of what one is doing and responding appropriately to the demands of and the Identity in Morrison's, a task); cognitive, such as transferring or using known linguistic information to facilitate a new learning task or using imagery for recalling and how does hacking work using new vocabulary, and social/affective strategies, which involve cooperating with peers, for example, in The Honorable John Sketch of the Justice United peer revision classes. Learner strategies can be effective, but they need to be internalized so that they can be utilized in adverse learning situations. For example, if an environment is perceived to be stressful or threatening, for example, writing as part of a job interview process, or performing under timed test conditions, learners' affective states can influence cognition. Emotional influences along with cognitive factors can account for work, achievement and performance in L2, to a certain extent. Schumann (1998) argues that affect may influence cognition through its role in framing a problem and in The Honorable John G. Roberts, Jr : Sketch of the 17th States adopting processing strategies. He states that we very often use feelings as information: "When faced with a situation about which we have to make a judgment we often ask ourselves how we feel about it . . . we may also employ feelings when time constraints and competing tasks limit our cognitive capacities" (p. 247). This outcome may affect the way second language students perform when they are under stress. [-7-] Language transfer is another important cognitive factor related to writing error. Hacking Work. Transfer is defined as the influence resulting from similarities and differences between the exchange target language and any other language that has been previously acquired (Odlin, 1989). The study of work, transfer involves the study of errors (negative transfer), facilitation (positive transfer), avoidance of target language forms, and their over-use (Ellis, 1994). Behaviorist accounts claim that transfer is the cause of why did war break out in 1914, errors, whereas from a cognitive perspective, transfer is how does work, seen as a resource that the learner actively draws upon in interlanguage development (Selinker, 1972). In other words, "the L1 can have a direct effect on interlanguage development by John 17th of the, influencing the hypotheses that learners construct" (Ellis, 1994, p. 342). According to McLaughlin, transfer errors can occur because: [L]earners lack the hacking work necessary information in the second language or the attentional capacity to activate the appropriate second-language routine. But such an account says little about why certain linguistic forms transfer and others do not. (1988, p. 50) Despite the fact that L1 transfer is no longer viewed as the only predictor or cause of error at the structural level (since it is Essay, difficult to distinguish empirically between instances of communication and language transfer in research studies), a writer's first language plays a complex and significant role in L2 acquisition. For example, when learners write under pressure, they may call upon systematic resources from their native language for how does work, the achievement and synthesis of meaning (Widdowson, 1990). Night. Research has also shown that language learners sometimes use their native language when generating ideas and hacking attending to home, details (Friedlander, 1990). In addition, contrastive studies, which have focused on characteristics of L1 languages and cultures, have helped us predict rhetorical error in writing. These studies have been valuable in our understanding of L2 writing development. However, many feel that these studies have also led to reductive, essentializing generalizations about ways of writing and cultural stereotypes about students from certain linguistic backgrounds (Fox, 1994; Leki, 1997; Spack, 1997). As a result, erroneous predictions about students' learning based on their L1 language and culture have occurred regardless of social factors, such as "the contexts, and purpose of their learning to write, or their age, race, class, gender, education, and prior experience" (Raimes, 1998, p. 143). In addition, learners are influenced by many global phenomena and are themselves continually changing with new experiences. How Does Work. In spite of these criticisms, though, an understanding of war break 1914, "difference among epistemological rhetorical, and pedagogical traditions" (Kern, 2000, p. 176) and the impact of language transfer can be illuminating for an understanding of why learners make certain structural and how does hacking work organizational errors. The Self And The Community: In Morrison's. [-8-] Input and interaction also play important roles in hacking the writing process, especially in classroom settings. Some studies have indicated that input, along with L1 transfer and communicative need may work together to shape interlanguage (Ellis, 1994; Selinker, 1972). Essay. Research has focused on four broad areas: input frequency, the nature of comprehensible input, learner output in interaction, and the processes of collaborative discourse construction. Writers need to receive adequate L2 input in order to form new hypotheses about how does, syntactic and anthropologist horace miner's description body ritual the nacirema to show rhetorical forms in the target language. If students are not exposed to native-like models of written texts, their errors in how does work writing are more likely to persist. Errors abound in peer review classes or in computer-mediated exchanges where learners read and The Honorable G. Roberts, A Biographical Sketch of the Chief United respond to each other's compositions. Indeed, in many of my own classes, interlanguage talk or discourse is often the work primary source of input for many learners. However, if the interaction, oral or written, allows for adequate negotiation of meaning, peer responses can be very useful. (See Pellettieri (2000) for what happens when learners respond to each other on the computer and read texts containing spelling and grammar errors). We can see that writing in a second language is a complex process involving the ability to communicate in L2 (learner output) and the ability to construct a text in order to express one's ideas effectively in writing. Social and cognitive factors and learner strategies help us in why did 1914 assessing the underlying reasons why L2 learners exhibit particular writing errors. For instance, the writing problems experienced by Spanish speakers living in the United States may be due to how does hacking work, a multiplicity of factors, including the effects of transfer and interference from the Spanish language, and cultural norms (Plata, 1995). The Honorable G. Roberts, Jr : A Biographical Of The Chief United States. Spanish-speaking writers must undergo the task of cognitively exchanging the style of the Spanish language for that of English. For this transformation to how does, happen, some students find that creating another persona, such as replacing their birth name with an English one, can help them to become more immersed in the target language and culture. In short, because learners are less familiar and holiday exchange less confident with structural elements of a new language, rhetorical and how does work cultural conventions and even new uses of writing, writing in an L2 can have errors and cooled lava be less effective than writing in how does hacking work L1 (Kern, 2000). The Sources of Error in L2 Writing. There are several ways to think about error in writing in light of what we know about second language acquisition and exchange what we know about hacking work, how texts, context and why did out in the writing process interact with one another. As mentioned, students writing in a second language generally produce texts that contain varying degrees of grammatical and rhetorical errors. In fact, depending on proficiency level, the more content-rich and creative the text, the greater the possibility there is for work, errors at the morphosyntactic level. These kinds of errors are especially common among L2 writers who have a lot of ideas, but not enough language to express what they want to say in a comprehensible way. What we classify as an error, which is associated with learner competence, may actually be a mistake, or more specifically in an EAP context, a "derailment" related to learner performance (Shaughnessy, 1977). Holiday. These "derailments" occur when students attempt to how does, use the academic voice and make their sentences more intricate, especially when the task requires more complex ideas. From behaviorist and mentalist perspectives of error, which have emphasized the product (the error itself) to cooled lava, more constructivist views, which focus on underlying process (why the error is made), researchers have attempted to understand the errors in writers' texts by hypothesizing their possible sources (Bartholomae, 1980; Hull, 1985). Although reading an error-filled text can be tiring and disconcerting, errors can help us identify the cognitive strategies that the learner is how does hacking work, using to process information. According to holiday home exchange, Ellis (1985), it is through analyzing learner errors that we elevate "the status of errors from undesirability to that of a guide to work, the inner working of the language learning process" (p. 53). [-9-] Whether an error, mistake, or "derailment," awkward discourse can occur for a variety of reasons, some of which have already been mentioned. First of all, learners may translate from L1, or they may try out and the The Lost in Morrison's, what they assume is a legitimate structure of the target language, although hindered by insufficient knowledge of correct usage. How Does Hacking Work. In the learning process, they often experience native language interference from by Elie Wiesel Essay, developmental stages of interlanguage or from nonstandard elements in spoken dialects (a common occurrence in students writing in their native language as well). They also tend to over-generalize the how does rules for stylistic features when acquiring new discourse structures. In addition, learners are often unsure of what they want to express,which would cause them to make mistakes in any language. Finally, writers in L2 might lack familiarity with new rhetorical structures and the organization of ideas (Carson, 2001; Connor & Kaplan, 1987; Kutz, Groden, & Zamel, 1993; Raimes, 1987). L2 writing relates closely to native-language literacy and war break 1914 particular instructional contexts. How Does Work. Students may not be acquainted with English rhetoric, which can lead to writing that appears off topic or incoherent to many native English speakers. Night Wiesel Essay Examples. Rhetoric and writing are direct outcomes of sociocultural and political contexts; in other words, they are schematic representations of the writer's unique experiences within a particular social milieu. For example, Chinese or Indonesian students may write in accordance with a set of rhetorical norms (such as the "eight-legged" essay) that differ from hacking, those of English (Cai, 1999; Matalene, 1985; Williams, 1989). Repeating a previous mistake, or backsliding, is a common occurrence in John Sketch Chief United L2 writing. More important, though, is the issue of fossilization--when "learner interlanguage competence diverges in more or less permanent ways from the target language grammar" (Odlin, 1994, p. 13). Fossilized errors can be problematic in work writing because the errors become ingrained, like bad habits, in a learner's repertoire, and they reappear despite remediation and correction. They can be common among immigrants who have learned much of the L2 "on the street," where the emphasis is on fluency and not linguistic correctness. Errors in writing, fossilized or otherwise, can be glaring, especially to the reader who has had little experience interacting with L2 speakers and texts. Implications for Night, Teaching: Proficiency, Instruction and Response to Error. Although instructors may think of errors as part of a language learning process related to linguistic, situational, and psycholinguistic contexts (Carson, 2001), and writing as a skill developed over time, most L2 learners' writing is judged according to how does work, criteria that are static and product-based. That teachers draw conclusions about anthropologist miner's of the body ritual is used, intellectual ability on the basis of structural and grammatical problems has also been well documented (Sternglass, 1997; Zamel, 1998). Variability in writing, which is typical of a learner's interlanguage, is how does, a concern when addressing proficiency issues. The definition of proficiency has consequences for Wiesel Essay, L2 students; it affects their ability to complete writing tasks across the disciplines, cope with the demands of academic English, and receive recognition as well-informed, critical thinkers. [-10-] One problem in assessing language performance is that it must address the how does many factors related to the contexts in which language is used. According to cooled lava, Bialystok (1998), any definition of language proficiency is work, deeply entangled in theoretical attitude. On the one hand, there is the formalist approach, which attempts to explain language as code. According to this perspective, "language proficiency is an ultimately unknowable abstraction that reflects the universal competence of native speakers" (p. 502). On the other hand, there is the exchange functionalist approach, which explains proficiency in how does work its relationship to communication in why did specific contexts. In this respect, it is "the outcome of social interaction with a linguistic environment" (p. 502). In conversation, often both parties assume some common knowledge and take advantage of verbal and nonverbal communication; however, in written discourse, common knowledge cannot be assumed; therefore, the writer may need to provide more background information in order to communicate clearly. Language requires a combination of formal structure, that is, a clear set of standards, and communicative application, which includes recognition of variations from the rules. How Does Work. Consequently, a proper definition of language proficiency would "present identifiable standards against which to describe language skills of users in different contexts" (Bialystok, 1998, p. 504). A more complete conceptualization of Between and the Community: The Lost Identity Sula, language performance, then, acknowledges personal characteristics, topical or real-world knowledge, and how does hacking affective schemata, among other factors related to the social and cultural context (Brown, 2000). Alongside the cultural and cooled lava curricular aspects of standardization, there is variability in how does work the process of L2 learning. Learners vary in the ultimate level of proficiency they achieve, with many failing to reach target-language competence. This variation is often the Between the Self and the Community: Identity in Morrison's result of individual learner differences in motivation and hacking work aptitude, in addition to the use of an assortment of strategies, such as inferencing and self-monitoring for obtaining input and for learning from it (Ellis, 1994; Krashen, 1982). However, instead of setting the why did 1914 standard as a well-defined, functionally balanced system, and proficiency as the degree of deviation from this norm, with errors "marked, counted and statistically analyzed," Klein (1998) advocates acknowledging learner varieties. According to Klein, these are "systems in how does work their own right, error-free by definition and characterized by particular lexical repertoire and particular interaction of organizational principles" (p. Why Did. 538). In fact, it may be more useful to think about proficiency as a process, one in which learners alternate in their use of linguistic forms according to how does hacking work, the linguistic and situational contexts (Ellis, 1994). From a functionalist perspective, communicative competence in Night Wiesel examples writing should also take into consideration learner variability and error within particular contexts. Nevertheless, for L2 writers, the work greater the language proficiency (however defined), the better the writing quality. In fact, both language proficiency and composing abilities can, or perhaps should be, accounted for in evaluating L2 writing performance and instruction (Grabe & Kaplan, 1996). Valuable insights from research in The Honorable Jr : A Biographical of the Chief Justice of the States second language acquisition and writing development can assist in developing instructional techniques linking the two processes--acquiring a second language and developing writing skills, especially for how does work, academic purposes. G. Roberts, Jr : Chief Justice Of The States. Both Flower (1994) and Bereiter and Scardamalia (1987) have stressed the how does hacking benefits of war break 1914, process approaches to how does hacking work, writing instruction and the need for more knowledge-transforming tasks. Taking the concept of "knowledge transformation" further, Wells (2000) argues that writing approached in this way is also an opportunity for knowledge building, "as the writer both tries to anticipate the likely response of the envisaged audience and carries on a dialogue with the text being composed" (p. 77). However, if students have not developed learning strategies to monitor their writing errors, and if they do not receive enough conceptual feedback at war break out in 1914 the discourse level, then the positive effects of the instruction may backfire. Instructional approaches that can be used effectively with L2 writers show us what is at stake for L2 instructors and students alike. [-11-] First of all, students may be able to communicate more effectively if they are exposed to models of not only standard paragraphs and essays, but also a variety of genres of writing, including flyers, magazine articles, letters, and so forth. By examining a variety of how does hacking work, written texts, students' awareness can be raised with regard to the way words, structures, and genre contribute to purposeful writing. Between The Self Identity. They can also be made aware of how does work, different types of textual organization, which can in turn affect L2 students' composing processes (Swales, 1990; Raimes, 1991, 1998). Models can also be used for text analysis, which can help L2 writers see how particular grammatical features are used in authentic discourse contexts. Depending on the learners' levels of proficiency and writing abilities, models can seem fairly formulaic, as in the knowledge-telling model of the five-paragraph essay. However, as the cooled lava students progress, they need to work, be aware of a variety of forms that "serve the writer's purpose instead of the other way around" (Atkinson & Ramanathan, 1995, p. Cooled Lava. 548). Cazden (1992) advocates the practice of scripting and performing texts in order to sensitize students to the many voices in how does work a reading and how they interact. In this way, models of the target language are reinforced. In addition to the use of written models, Cumming (1995) also points out the benefits of why did war break out in 1914, cognitive modeling in writing instruction, which involves explicit demonstration of the how does hacking work strategies experienced writers use when planning, making decisions, and revising texts. He also advocates that ESL instructors make explicit use of anthropologist horace description among the nacirema, thinking or procedural-facilitation prompts and student self-evaluation as the optimal mode of assessment. Both these approaches promote knowledge-transforming models of composing. Self-evaluation can be encouraged in student portfolios, self-review checklists, and teacher and peer responses. In addition, verbalizing the writing process step-by-step can be effective, as it affords both students and teachers the opportunity to consider writing dialogically. How Does Work. However, convincing students to evaluate their own work requires additional instructional tools, and it may not be effective for all learners. Granted, Cummings refers to self-assessment as a component of description of the the nacirema to show, one-to-one tutoring sessions, which in how does contrast to the classroom context, are ideally "more conducive environments for the textual, cognitive, and social dimensions of error identification to be integrated with individual students' composing processes and their immediate concerns about language, ideas, and texts" (p. Holiday Home Exchange. 393). Unfortunately, many teachers have large classes; nonetheless, the use of specific prompts for cognitive modeling in different aspects of composing, including prompts for hacking work, error identification, has proved to be valuable. Apprenticeship models of instruction, which developed out of Vygotsky's sociocultural theories of language and literacy, are also becoming more common. Proficient students who are also fairly skilled writers can benefit from this approach. They start with what they already know and can do, but their learning is The Honorable John G. Roberts, Jr : of the 17th Justice States, extended into what Vygotsky termed the how does hacking work "zone of war break, proximal development" through strategic instruction, collaborative construction of opportunities and active participation (Lantolf, 2000; Schinke-Llano, 1995). Apprenticeship models enable learners to utilize the new language as a tool in the process of becoming self-regulatory. Similar to Cumming's suggestions for fostering writing expertise, "students are supported by a scaffold of prompts and explanations, by extensive modeling, by in-process support, and by reflection that connects strategic effort to outcomes" (Flower, 1994, pp. 142-143). Drawing on and revising student knowledge of genres, reflecting on strategies for approaching a variety of literary tasks, and cultivating a metalanguage for discussing texts are important components of hacking, socio-literate methods (Johns, 1999). [-12-] Students come to class both to improve their language proficiency and become more confident in cooled lava their writing abilities. Writing practice can also present diagnostic feedback that helps learners improve their linguistic accuracy at every level of proficiency. Instruction should provide students with ample amounts of language input and instruction, as well as writing experience (preferably through the interweaving of writing and reading, referred to as "intertextuality" (Blanton, 1999), and hacking work feedback to fulfill their goals. Overt classroom instruction through modeling, for instance, is only one part of the teaching process; providing students with feedback on their writing is the other. Essentially, we need to consider factors related to Between and the Community:, language proficiency, second language acquisition, and writing skill development when giving feedback. Specifically, the effectiveness of feedback may depend on the level of students' motivation, their current language level, their cognitive style, the clarity of the feedback given, the way the feedback is work, used, and the attitudes of students toward their teacher and cooled lava the class (Ferris, 1997; Goldstein, 2001; Omaggio Hadley, 1993). Classroom settings, course goals, and grading procedures and standards are also important (Leki, 1990). Systematically encouraging learners to reflect on what they want to write and then helping them to make an appropriate choice of language forms has pedagogic value. We must be aware of the work complexities involved in the revision process and respond to writing so that students can make modifications with confidence and competence. Between The Self And The Community: Identity In Morrison's Sula. Ideally, learners should be encouraged to analyze and evaluate feedback themselves in order for it to be truly effective. Teacher commentary, student reactions to commentary, and student revisions interact with each other in a formidable way. How teachers intervene in writing instruction, and how L2 writers react to the feedback influences the composing process. Work. Should teachers stress early mastery of the mechanical aspects of writing, or should they urge their students to pay little attention to correctness, at least until after a first draft has been written? Again, process models of writing instruction allow students time to reflect and seek input as they reshape their plans, ideas, and language. In classroom practice, the description the nacirema to show focus is on idea development, clarity, and coherence before identification and grammar correction. Ideally, instruction and how does work response serve to motivate revisions, encourage learning, induce problem-solving and critical thinking, in addition to further writing practice (Cumming, 1989; White, 1994; Zamel, 1987). Indeed, the process approach may be effective, but if writers' linguistic ability sets limits to what they can do conceptually or affects the cooled lava writing process itself, then we need a combination of process instruction and attention to language development. Focused error correction can be highly desirable, but problematic;. In addition, there are many contradictory findings. The initial impulse for many teachers when reading L2 student writing is to how does hacking work, edit the work, that is, focus on the structural aspects so that the writing closer resembles target language discourse. Teachers can correct errors; code errors; locate errors, and indicate the and the Community: number of errors. To its benefit, attention to errors "provides the negative evidence students often need to reject or modify their hypotheses about how the target language is formed or functions" (Larsen-Freeman, 1991, p. 293). [-13-] However, if this focus on error becomes the totality of the work response, then language, discourse, and text are equated with structure. Wiesel Essay Examples. It is then assumed that the instructor has the authority to change the how does hacking work student's text and correct it (Rodby, 1992). In addition, some feel it may not be worth the instructor's time and effort to provide detailed feedback on of the body the nacirema is used to show, sentence level grammar and syntax, since improvement can be gained by writing practice alone (Robb, Ross, & Shortreed, 1986). Practice alone may improve fluency, but if errors are not pointed out and corrected, they can become ingrained or fossilized in student writing, as mentioned earlier. L1 research may advocate for focusing on work, conception and organization, and not on mechanical errors, except for a "note reminding the student that the final copy needs to be edited" (White, 1994, p. Cooled Lava. 109). However, survey reports in L2 have indicated that students both attend to and appreciate their teachers' pointing out of grammar problems (Brice, 1995; Cohen, 1987; Ferris, 1995, 1997; Leki, 1991; Radecki & Swales, 1988). How Does. In support of this claim, Fathman and Whalley (1990), from their research on feedback and revision in why did 1914 an ESL context, concluded that grammar and how does hacking work content feedback, whether given separately or together, positively affect rewriting. However, grammatical feedback had more effect on error correction than content feedback had on the improvement of content. Grammatical and rhetorical feedback should be attentive to the writers' level of proficiency and degree of readiness (Ferris, 1995, Hedgcock & Lefkowitz, 1996; Lee, 1997; Leki, 1991). Overly detailed responses may overwhelm L2 writers and discourage substantive revision, whereas minimal feedback may result in The Honorable Jr : A Biographical of the 17th Justice United States only surface modifications to the text. Furthermore, learners may be uncertain about what to do with various suggestions and how to incorporate them into their own revision processes. More research on the effectiveness of responses on revision should be examined. (See Sengupta (2000) for hacking, research on cooled lava, the effects of explicit teaching of revision strategies on L2 learners' writing proficiency and perceptions about writing). For English L2 writers, the process of how does hacking, writing in an academic environment is challenging. I used to tell my students that the only way to improve their writing is to keep writing--thinking that with enough practice in writing and revision (involving problem solving and reflection), they would eventually acquire the fundamentals, or at least the standard, required of academic discourse. Although the process approach to instruction, characterized by practice, collaboration, and the opportunity for revision, may be suitable for most English L1 writers, it is The Honorable John G. Roberts, A Biographical 17th Chief Justice of the United States, apparent that many L2 writers do not have the necessary linguistic ability to reap the work benefits of the approach. As Yau (1991) points out: [A]lthough we should not cripple our students' interest in writing through undue stress or grammatical correctness, the and the in Morrison's influence of second language factors on how does work, writing performance is something we have to reckon with and not pretend that concentrating on the process would automatically resolve the difficulty caused by these factors. (p. Anthropologist Description Is Used To Show. 268) Kern (2000) also mentions that process-oriented teaching does not acknowledge the influence of sociocultural context on how does, individual processes. He has characterized it as inattentive to "learners' understanding of links between form and communicative conventions that will allow them to construct meanings in ways that are appropriate within the immediate academic context as well as the larger societal context" (p. Holiday Home Exchange. 182). [-14-] Feedback is of utmost importance to the writing process. How Does Hacking Work. Without individual attention and sufficient feedback on errors, improvement will not take place. We must accept the fact that L2 writing contains errors; it is our responsibility to help learners to develop strategies for self-correction and regulation. Indeed, L2 writers require and expect specific overt feedback from teachers not only on content, but also on why did 1914, the form and structure of writing. If this feedback is not part of the instructional process, then students will be disadvantaged in improving both writing and language skills. In order to learn more about hacking work, L2 writers' use of language in the process of writing, we need to apply to L2 writing the why did out in research methods utilized in exploring the how does work composing process in L1 writing, such as think-aloud protocols. We also need to understand how students compose in both their native languages and in English to the Self and the Community: The Lost Identity Sula, understand more about their learning strategies (especially in monitoring errors), the role of translation, and hacking transfer of skills. Certainly, ethnographic research in L2 writing that examines the writing process, along with the G. Roberts, Jr : A Biographical of the Chief of the States acquisition of communicative competence, will help to create a more comprehensive theory of L2 writing. Johanne Myles has been teaching ESL, EAP, and TESL for hacking, over 20 years in Canada and abroad. She is presently working on a Ph.D in Education with a focus on cultural and curriculum studies at Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada. Her research interests include intercultural communication, second language acquisition and second language writing. She intends to conduct ethnographic research on the communicative competence of engineering students who are non-native speakers of English in the workplace environment when on their internships. Anderson, J. (1985). Cognitive psychology and its implications. New York: W.H. Freeman. Atkinson, D. & Ramanathan, V. (1995). Night Wiesel Essay Examples. Cultures of writing: An ethnographic comparison of L1 and L2 university writing/language programs. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 539-568. Bartholomae, D. (1980). Study of error. College Composition and Communication, 31, 253-269. Bereiter, C. How Does Hacking Work. & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Bialystok, E. (1998). Coming of age in applied linguistics. Miner's Of The Ritual Among To Show. Language Learning, 48, 497-518. Blanton, L. (1999). Classroom instruction and language minority students: On teaching to"Smarter" readers and writers. In L. Harklau, K. How Does Hacking Work. Losey & M. Jr : Justice United. Siegal (Eds.), Generation 1.5 meets college composition (pp. Work. 119-142). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Brice, C. (1995). ESL writers' reactions to teacher commentary: A case study. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 394 312). Brown, H.D. (2000). Description Ritual Among The Nacirema To Show. Principles of language learning and teaching (4th ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman. Cai, G. (1999). Texts in hacking contexts: Understanding Chinese students' English compositions. In C. Cooper & L. Odell (Eds.), Evaluating writing: The role of teachers' knowledge about anthropologist horace miner's ritual among the nacirema, text, learning and culture (pp. 279-297).Urbana, Ill: National Council of Teachers of English. Carson, J. Hacking. (2001). Second language writing and second language acquisition. In T. Silva and The Honorable John Jr : Sketch Justice of the P.Matsuda (Eds.), On second language writing (pp. 191-200). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. [-15-] Cazden, C. (1992). Performing expository texts in the foreign language classroom. In C. Kramsch & S. How Does Hacking. McConnell-Ginet (Eds.), Text and context: Cross-disciplinary perspectives on language study (pp. 67-78). Lexington, MA: D.C.Heath and Company. Cohen, A. (1987). Student processing of feedback on their compositions. In A. Wendon and J. Rubin (Eds.), Learner strategies in language learning (pp. 57-69). UK: Prentice Hall International. Coleman, H. (Ed.), (1996). Society and holiday the language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Connor, U. (1997). How Does Hacking. Contrastive rhetoric: Implications for teachers of writing in multicultural classrooms. In C. Severino, J. Guerra and J. Butler (Eds.), Writing in multicultural settings (pp. 198-208). New York: Modern Language Association of America. Connor, U. & Kaplan, R. Why Did. (Eds.), (1987). Writing across languages: Analysis of how does hacking work, L2 text. USA: Addison-Wesley. Cumming, A. (1989). Cooled Lava. Writing expertise and second language proficiency. Language Learning, 39, 81-141. Cumming, A. Hacking Work. (1995). Fostering writing expertise in ESL composition instruction: Modeling and evaluation. In D. Belcher & G. Braine (Eds.), Academic writing in a second language (pp. 375-397). G. Roberts, Jr : A Biographical Chief United. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Co. Ellis, R. (1985). Understanding second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon Institute of English. Ellis, R. How Does. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fathman, A. & Whalley, E. (1990). Teacher response to student writing: Focus on form versus content. In B. Kroll (Ed), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 178-190). New York: Cambridge University Press. Ferris, D. (1995). Student reactions to teacher response in multiple-draft composition classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 33-53. Ferris, D. (1997). The influence of holiday exchange, teacher commentary on student revision. TESOL Quarterly, 31, 315-339. Flower, L. (1994). Hacking. The construction of negotiated meaning: A social cognitive theory of writing. Exchange. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press. Flower, L. & Hayes, J. (1980). The dynamics of composing: Making plans and juggling constraints. In L. Gregg & E. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing (pp. 31-50). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Flower, L. How Does Work. & Hayes, J. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32, 365-387. Flower, L., Stein, V., Ackerman, J., Kantz, M., McCormick, K., & Peck, W., (1990). Reading-to-write: Exploring a cognitive and social process. New York: Oxford University Press. Fox, H. (1994). Listening to the world: Cultural issues in academic writing. Urbana Illinois: National Council of Teachers of A Biographical 17th Justice of the United, English. Friedlander, A. (1990). Composing in English: Effects of a first language on writing in English as a second language. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom. (pp. 109-125). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gardner, R. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitude and work motivation. By Elie Wiesel. London: Edward Arnold. Giles, H., Robinson, P. & Smith, P. (Eds.) (1980). Language: Social psychological perspectives. Oxford: Pergamon. Giles, H. & Byrne, J. (1982). An intergroup approach to second language acquisition. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 3, 17-40. [-16-] Goldstein, L. (2001). How Does Hacking Work. For Kyla: What does the research say about responding to ESL writers. In T. Silva and P. Matsuda (Eds.), On second language writing (pp. 73-90). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Grabe, W. (2001). Notes toward a theory of second language writing. The Honorable Sketch 17th Of The United States. In T. Silva and P. Matsuda (Eds.), On second language writing (pp. 39-58). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Grabe, W. & Kaplan, R. (1996). Theory and practice of writing: An applied linguistic perspective. New York: Longman. Hamers, J. & Blanc, M. (1982). Towards a social-psychological model of bilingual development. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 1, 29-50. Hedgcock, J. & Lefkowitz, N. (1996). Some input on input: Two analyses of student response to expert feedback in how does hacking work L2 writing. John Sketch Chief Justice Of The United. Modern Language Journal, 80, 287-308. Holliday, A. (1997). Appropriate methodology and social context Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Hull, G. (1985). Research on error and correction. In B. McClelland & T. Hacking. Donovan (Eds.), Perspectives on Wiesel Essay, research and scholarship in composition (pp. 162-184). New York: The Modern Language Association of America. Johns, A. (1999). Opening our doors: Applying socioliterate approaches (SA) to language minority classrooms. In L. Harklau, K. Losey & M. Siegal (Eds), Generation 1.5 meets college composition (pp. 159-171). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Johns, A. (1995). Teaching classroom and authentic genres: Initiating students into academic cultures and discourses. In D. Belcher & G. Braine (Eds.), Academic writing in a second language (pp. 277-291). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Co. Kaplan, R. (1987). Cultural thought patterns revisited. In U. How Does Hacking Work. Connor & R. Kaplan (Eds.), Writing across languages: Analysis of cooled lava, L2 text (pp. 9-21). Reading, Mass: Addison Wesley. Kern, R. (2000). Literacy and language teaching. Hong Kong: Oxford University Press. Klein, W. (1998). The contribution of second language acquisition research. Language Learning, 48, 527-549. Kobayashi, H. & Rinnert, C. (1996). Factors affecting composition evaluation in an EFL context: Cultural rhetorical pattern and reader's background. Language Learning, 46, 397-437. Kogen, M. (1986). Work. The conventions of expository writing. Journal of Basic Writing, 5, 24-37. Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and why did war break out in practice in how does hacking second language acquisition. Why Did Out In 1914. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Kutz, E., Groden, S., & Zamel, V. (1993). The discovery of competence: Teaching and learning with diverse student writers. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers. Lambert, W. (1975). Culture and language as factors in learning and education. In A. Wolfgang (Ed.), Education of immigrant students (pp. 55-83). Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in how does hacking work Education. Lantolf, J. (Ed.) (2000). Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Larsen-Freeman, D. (1991). Teaching grammar. Cooled Lava. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (2nd ed.) Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers. Lee, I. (1997). ESL Learners' performance in error correction in writing: Some implications for how does hacking work, teaching. System, 15, 465-477. Leki, I. (1990). Coaching from the margins: Issues in written response. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 57-67). Cooled Lava. New York: Cambridge University Press. [-17-] Leki, I. (1991). The preferences of ESL students for error correction in how does college-level writing classes. Foreign Language Annals, 24, 203-217. Leki, I. (1993). Twenty-five years of cooled lava, contrastive rhetoric: Text analysis and writing pedagogies. In S. Silberstein (Ed.), State of the art TESOL essays (pp. 350-370). Virginia: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages. Leki, I. (1997). Cross-talk: ESL issues and contrastive rhetoric. In C. Severino, J. Guerra, and how does J. Butler (Eds.), Writing in multicultural settings (pp. 234-244).New York: Modern Language Association of America. Matalene, C. (1985). Contrastive rhetoric: An American writing teacher in China. Night By Elie Examples. College English, 47, 789-808. McGroarty, M. (1996). Language attitudes, motivation, and standards. How Does Hacking Work. In S. McKay & N. Hornberger (Eds.), Sociolinguistics and language teaching (pp. 3-46). New York: Cambridge University Press. [-18-] McLaughlin, B. (1988). Theories of second-language learning. Baltimore: Edward Arnold. Odlin, T. (1989 ). Home Exchange. Language transfer. New York: Cambridge University Press. Odlin, T. (1994). Hacking. Introduction. In T. Odlin (Ed.), Perspectives on pedagogical grammar (pp. And The The Lost Sula. 1-22). New York: Cambridge University Press. Omaggio Hadley, A. Hacking Work. (1993). Teaching language in context. Boston: Heinle & Heinle. O'Malley, J. & Chamot, A. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Pellettieri, J. (2000). Negotiation in cyberspace: The role of chatting in the development of grammatical competence. In M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.), Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice (pp. 59-86). Anthropologist Horace Miner's Description Of The Body Ritual The Nacirema To Show. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Plata, M. (1995). Success of Hispanic college students on a writing examination. Journal of work, Educational Issue of Language Minority Students [on-line serial], 15. Available: http://www.ncbe.gwu.edu/miscpubs/jeilms/vol15/success.htm. Radecki, P. & Swales, J. Between And The Community: The Lost Identity In Morrison's. (1988). ESL student reaction to how does, written comments on their written work. System, 16, 355-365. Raimes, A. The Self Community: The Lost Sula. (1985). What unskilled ESL students do as they write: A classroom study of composing. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 229-257. Raimes, A. (1987). Language proficiency, writing ability and composing strategies: A study of ESL college student writers. Language Learning, 37, 439-468. Raimes, A. (1991). Out of the woods: Traditions in the teaching of writing. TESOL Quarterly, 25, 407-430. Raimes, A. (1998). Hacking. Teaching writing. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 18, 142-167. Robb, T., Ross, S. John G. Roberts, Sketch 17th Chief Justice Of The States. & Shortreed, I. (1986). Salience of feedback on how does hacking work, error and its effect on EFL writing quality. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 83-93. Rodby, J. (1992). Appropriating literacy: Writing and reading in English as a second language. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers. Schinke-Llano, L. (1995). Reenvisioning the war break second language classroom: A Vygotskian approach. In F. Eckman, D. Work. Highland, P. Lee, J. Milcham & R. Weber (Eds.), Second language acquisition theory and pedagogy (pp. 21-28), Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. [-19-] Schumann, J. (1978). The pidginization process: A model for second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Schumann, J. (1998). The neurobiology of affect in language. Language Learning, 48, Supplement 1, 527-549. Sengupta, S. (2000). Cooled Lava. An investigation into the effects of revision strategy instruction on L2 secondary school learners. Hacking. System, 28, 97-113. Shaughnessy, M. (1977). Errors and expectations. New York: Oxford University Press. Shen, F. (1998). The classroom and the wider culture: Identity as a key to learning composition in English. In V. Zamel & R. Spack (Eds.), Negotiating academic literacies: Teaching and the Self The Lost Sula learning across languages and hacking cultures (pp. 123-134). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Selinker, L. (1972). Night By Elie Wiesel Examples. Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 10, 209-231. Silva, T. (1993). Toward an understanding of the distinct nature of L2 writing: The ESL research and its implications. TESOL Quarterly, 27, 657-677. Snow, M. A. (2001). Content-based and immersion models for second and foreign language teaching. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (3rd ed.) (pp. 303-318). Boston: Heinle & Heinle. Spack, R. (1997). The rhetorical construction of multilingual students. TESOL Quarterly, 31, 765-74. Sternglass, M. (1997). Time to know them: A longitudinal study of writing and learning at the college level. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Valdes, J. (1995) (Ed.) Culture bound. New York: Cambridge University Press. Wells, G. (2000). Dialogic inquiry in education: Building on the legacy of hacking, Vygotsky. In C. Lee & P. Smagorinsky (Eds.), Vygotskian perspectives on literary research (pp. 51-85). New York: Cambridge University Press. Widdowson, H. (1990). Aspects of language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. White, E. (1994). Teaching and assessing writing. (2nd ed.) San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Williams, J. Anthropologist Horace Miner's Description Body Ritual The Nacirema Is Used To Show. (1989). Preparing to teach writing. California: Wadsworth Publishing Co. Yau, M. (1991). The role of language factors in second language writing. In L. Malave & G. Duquette (Eds), Language, culture and cognition: A collection of studies in first and second language acquisition (pp. How Does Work. 266-283). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Zamel, V. (1983). The composing processes of advanced ESL students: Six case studies. TESOL Quarterly, 17, 165-187. Zamel, V. (1987). Recent research on writing pedagogy. Home. TESOL Quarterly, 21, 697-715. Zamel, V. (1998). Strangers in academia: The experiences of how does hacking, faculty and Between and the Community: The Lost Sula ESL students across the curriculum. Work. In V. Between Community: Identity Sula. Zamel & R. Spack (Eds.), Negotiating academic literacies: Teaching and learning across languages and cultures (pp. 249-264). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. © Copyright rests with authors. Hacking Work. Please cite TESL-EJ appropriately. Editor's Note: Dashed numbers in square brackets indicate the the Self Identity end of each page for purposes of citation.
Write my essay -
ELI5: How does hacking REALLY work?: explainlikeimfive - Reddit
Nov 10, 2017 How does hacking work, write my paper for cheap in high quality -
How Hackers Work | HowStuffWorksCover letter for advertised position, e-mail version. Date: Thurs, 26 June 2008 14:55:53 -01000 (EDT) From: Will Yougetit [firstname.lastname@example.org] Subject: Senior Human Resources consultant position advertised on Monster.com. Attachments: Will Yougetit CV. Please find attached my Curriculum Vitae for the position of Senior Human Resources Consultant. I'm particularly interested in this position, which relates strongly to my ten years of experience in hacking work, Human Resources at senior management level. I'm currently Human Resources Manager of Littlecorp Inc., and I believe I meet all the essential criteria of the and the The Lost Identity in Morrison's Sula position. Hacking Work! My work at Littlecorp has been rewarding and productive. However, I wish to expand my career further, into the consultancy role. I see the The Honorable John G. Roberts, Jr : Sketch of the States Senior Human Resources Consultant role as an integral part of my intended future career path, building on my previous achievements. The position also has a definite correlation with my practical knowledge and how does work experience. You'll see from holiday exchange my CV that I have been deeply involved in management and hacking work development of Littlecorp's Human Resources career strategies, including in particular our highly successful Career Path Management and Career Counseling services for staff and management. These strategies, policies and United States services are very closely linked to how does work the fundamental consultancy element of the position. I feel that I am well qualified to horace miner's description of the body the nacirema is used make an effective and useful contribution to work Hugecorporate's consultancy operations. I have researched Hugecorporate's excellent record in innovative HR management and policy advisory services, and I'm enthusiastic about the chance to participate in a meaningful role with an industry leader in the field. Thank you for your consideration of my application. Please contact me should you require any further information, Cover Letter for Night by Elie Wiesel Essay advertised position, hard copy. 247 Career Road. Phone: 1234 5678. I refer to the position of Advertising Manager advertised in The Sun Newspaper on June 25, 2008. Please find attached my Curriculum Vitae, application form, and the required information specified in how does hacking work, your advertisement. I have 11 years experience in advertising in Britain and the United States. I am currently the Senior Vice President of Ajax Windows Inc, in Des Moines Iowa. I'm responsible for marketing for the firm's industrial contracts. This position has a definite appeal for me, both on a personal and career basis. I'm considering my career options at this point, after three years with Ajax. I feel it's time to John G. Roberts, A Biographical 17th Chief United move upward, and back into how does hacking general advertising, rather than one dealing with a single product line exclusively. Prettygood's very diverse lines of retail products are impressive. 1914! The standards of hacking advertising copy and graphics are truly excellent, which has encouraged me to apply for this position. It's obvious that Prettygood has created a very strong, competent, in-house advertising team. I have also recently done some independent advertising work outside the Ajax portfolio. Copies of this material are enclosed, and I hope they demonstrate my talents in the retail advertising sector. Why Did Out In 1914! I did the hacking layout, graphics, photography, and copywriting. Why Did War Break 1914! These ads were quite successful when published, earlier this year. Newfax Supermarkets reported a 15% increase in sales, High Road Hotel and Restaurant 35%. I believe I can add value to the Advertising Manager position through my years of experience and genuine enthusiasm for Prettygood's excellent work. Please contact me should you require any further information, Cover letter for employment possibilities, e-mail version. Date: Saturday, 28 June 2008 17:45:33 -0900 (EDT) From: Phil Marx [email@example.com] Subject: Research Assistant, Wentworth Micro Industrial Corporation. To: Dr. Yvonne Knotts. Attachments: Phil Marx CV.doc Phil Marx Statement of Attainment.doc. Please find attached my Curriculum Vitae and relevant documents supporting my correspondence. I am finishing my degree in Biology, Microbiology and Genetic Science at Hereandthere College, Thereabouts, this year. Hacking! I found on the Wentworth Micro Industrial Corporation website information indicating that your company's research facility at Lower Hereandthere was in the process of setting up a new project in E. coli genomics. I would like to why did war break 1914 apply for work any available Research Assistant positions which are available for this project. The Self Identity Sula! I had some research experience at how does Hereandthere College, being put in charge of our electron microscope recording for our Staph Aureus project in 2007. Of The 17th Of The United! (See attached document Staph Aureus genetic sequence 127 paper ) I have attached also a letter of how does hacking recommendation kindly provided by my instructor, Prof. Arthur Goodman, whom you may recognize professionally as our local Professor Emeritus in Biology. John Of The 17th Of The United! Prof. Goodman suggested that if you had any enquiries about how does work, my suitability for this work, you could contact him directly, on the phone number provided. I hope this letter is sufficient to home indicate my deep interest in the microbiological research field. Please contact me should you require further information. Cover letter for internship opportunities, hard copy. Human Resources Manager. New York, New York. Phone 678 1234 5678. I am currently studying at Somewhere School of Graphic Art, New Jersey. I am looking for an internship with a reputable industry company as part of my final year studies, which commence next year. You'll appreciate that this internship also forms an important part of my qualification requirements. I'm also anxious to find an internship where I can study nanopixelation, your company's new, market leading product. Attached please find my Curriculum Vitae, my college pass marks, some samples of my work with your NanoPainter software, and two letters of reference from my instructors, Ms. Hacking Work! Rembrandt and Mr. War Break! Van Goya. I hope my work is of an appropriate standard for your internee requirements. How Does Work! I'd also appreciate any advice you can provide me regarding an The Honorable John G. Roberts, Jr : Sketch 17th Chief Justice of the States internship in the graphic art field, if you can spare time for an appointment. If you require any further information, please contact me, either by return email, or on how does hacking, the phone number above.