• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content

site logo
The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language
search
  • Home
  • About TESL-EJ
  • Vols. 1-15 (1994-2012)
    • Volume 1
      • Volume 1, Number 1
      • Volume 1, Number 2
      • Volume 1, Number 3
      • Volume 1, Number 4
    • Volume 2
      • Volume 2, Number 1 — March 1996
      • Volume 2, Number 2 — September 1996
      • Volume 2, Number 3 — January 1997
      • Volume 2, Number 4 — June 1997
    • Volume 3
      • Volume 3, Number 1 — November 1997
      • Volume 3, Number 2 — March 1998
      • Volume 3, Number 3 — September 1998
      • Volume 3, Number 4 — January 1999
    • Volume 4
      • Volume 4, Number 1 — July 1999
      • Volume 4, Number 2 — November 1999
      • Volume 4, Number 3 — May 2000
      • Volume 4, Number 4 — December 2000
    • Volume 5
      • Volume 5, Number 1 — April 2001
      • Volume 5, Number 2 — September 2001
      • Volume 5, Number 3 — December 2001
      • Volume 5, Number 4 — March 2002
    • Volume 6
      • Volume 6, Number 1 — June 2002
      • Volume 6, Number 2 — September 2002
      • Volume 6, Number 3 — December 2002
      • Volume 6, Number 4 — March 2003
    • Volume 7
      • Volume 7, Number 1 — June 2003
      • Volume 7, Number 2 — September 2003
      • Volume 7, Number 3 — December 2003
      • Volume 7, Number 4 — March 2004
    • Volume 8
      • Volume 8, Number 1 — June 2004
      • Volume 8, Number 2 — September 2004
      • Volume 8, Number 3 — December 2004
      • Volume 8, Number 4 — March 2005
    • Volume 9
      • Volume 9, Number 1 — June 2005
      • Volume 9, Number 2 — September 2005
      • Volume 9, Number 3 — December 2005
      • Volume 9, Number 4 — March 2006
    • Volume 10
      • Volume 10, Number 1 — June 2006
      • Volume 10, Number 2 — September 2006
      • Volume 10, Number 3 — December 2006
      • Volume 10, Number 4 — March 2007
    • Volume 11
      • Volume 11, Number 1 — June 2007
      • Volume 11, Number 2 — September 2007
      • Volume 11, Number 3 — December 2007
      • Volume 11, Number 4 — March 2008
    • Volume 12
      • Volume 12, Number 1 — June 2008
      • Volume 12, Number 2 — September 2008
      • Volume 12, Number 3 — December 2008
      • Volume 12, Number 4 — March 2009
    • Volume 13
      • Volume 13, Number 1 — June 2009
      • Volume 13, Number 2 — September 2009
      • Volume 13, Number 3 — December 2009
      • Volume 13, Number 4 — March 2010
    • Volume 14
      • Volume 14, Number 1 — June 2010
      • Volume 14, Number 2 – September 2010
      • Volume 14, Number 3 – December 2010
      • Volume 14, Number 4 – March 2011
    • Volume 15
      • Volume 15, Number 1 — June 2011
      • Volume 15, Number 2 — September 2011
      • Volume 15, Number 3 — December 2011
      • Volume 15, Number 4 — March 2012
  • Vols. 16-Current
    • Volume 16
      • Volume 16, Number 1 — June 2012
      • Volume 16, Number 2 — September 2012
      • Volume 16, Number 3 — December 2012
      • Volume 16, Number 4 – March 2013
    • Volume 17
      • Volume 17, Number 1 – May 2013
      • Volume 17, Number 2 – August 2013
      • Volume 17, Number 3 – November 2013
      • Volume 17, Number 4 – February 2014
    • Volume 18
      • Volume 18, Number 1 – May 2014
      • Volume 18, Number 2 – August 2014
      • Volume 18, Number 3 – November 2014
      • Volume 18, Number 4 – February 2015
    • Volume 19
      • Volume 19, Number 1 – May 2015
      • Volume 19, Number 2 – August 2015
      • Volume 19, Number 3 – November 2015
      • Volume 19, Number 4 – February 2016
    • Volume 20
      • Volume 20, Number 1 – May 2016
      • Volume 20, Number 2 – August 2016
      • Volume 20, Number 3 – November 2016
      • Volume 20, Number 4 – February 2017
    • Volume 21
      • Volume 21, Number 1 – May 2017
      • Volume 21, Number 2 – August 2017
      • Volume 21, Number 3 – November 2017
      • Volume 21, Number 4 – February 2018
    • Volume 22
      • Volume 22, Number 1 – May 2018
      • Volume 22, Number 2 – August 2018
      • Volume 22, Number 3 – November 2018
      • Volume 22, Number 4 – February 2019
    • Volume 23
      • Volume 23, Number 1 – May 2019
      • Volume 23, Number 2 – August 2019
      • Volume 23, Number 3 – November 2019
      • Volume 23, Number 4 – February 2020
    • Volume 24
      • Volume 24, Number 1 – May 2020
      • Volume 24, Number 2 – August 2020
      • Volume 24, Number 3 – November 2020
      • Volume 24, Number 4 – February 2021
    • Volume 25
      • Volume 25, Number 1 – May 2021
      • Volume 25, Number 2 – August 2021
      • Volume 25, Number 3 – November 2021
      • Volume 25, Number 4 – February 2022
    • Volume 26
      • Volume 26, Number 1 – May 2022
      • Volume 26, Number 2 – August 2022
      • Volume 26, Number 3 – November 2022
  • Books
  • How to Submit
    • Submission Procedures
    • Ethical Standards for Authors and Reviewers
    • TESL-EJ Style Sheet for Authors
    • TESL-EJ Tips for Authors
    • Book Review Policy
    • Media Review Policy
    • APA Style Guide
  • TESL-EJ Editorial Board

Crafting Compositions: Tools for Today’s Writers

June 2005 — Volume 9, Number 1

Crafting Compositions: Tools for Today’s Writers
Author: Janet Giannotti (2004)  
book cover
Publisher: Ann Arbor: Michigan Press
Title Pages ISBN Price
Student Book Pp. xiii + 245 0-472-08933-1 $19.95

Crafting Compositions: Tools for Today’s Writers is aimed at the beginner ESL student unfamiliar with English language writing conventions and is an excellent tool for any ESL composition teacher. Structured thematically, this textbook is divided into six chapters, with titles such as Narrating Experiences, Giving Examples, and Cause and Effect, to name a few. The writing activities are largely expressivist, (i.e., personal narratives), because, as the author notes “personal writing is the best way to help your students become stronger and more confident writers” (p. ix).

The textbook does not subscribe to the belief that writing should be taught separately from reading. As a result, each chapter begins with an authentic opinion article from a college newspaper, and these articles then become the basis for eliciting reactions from students and developing awareness of rhetorical strategy. Many composition researchers hold the belief that reading and writing have a significant relationship (Shanahan, 1984; Esmaeili, 2002; Eisterhold, 1990; Tierney & Shanahan, 1991), thus the two are often taught together, as is the case here.

To deepen understanding of each chapter’s article and the rhetorical strategies used, each chapter follows with a series of exercises on content and analysis. These are well-formulated exercises, and usefully illustrate the rhetorical skills and strategies many writers employ. Analysis questions are particularly useful in developing an awareness of writing strategies, and these questions deconstruct topics such as direct and indirect quoting, developing lead-ins to a text, and writing a conclusion. The activities usually culminate in a freewriting activity in which students integrate personal reactions and practice previously studied rhetorical techniques.

In addition to broad composition skills (i.e., brainstorming content, organization, giving examples, quoting, providing background), students also develop their writing at the sentential and inter-sentential level through mini-lessons. These mini-lessons cover topics such as modifying the certitude of a statement, developing transitions between sentences, writing conclusion sentences, giving examples, and demonstrating cause and effect. Each chapter also focuses on a grammatical aspect of writing such as the use of possessives, nominalizations, infinitives, and gerunds.

Crafting Compositions incorporates peer input into many activities. This benefits students by giving them reactions from real readers and developing a real sense of audience (Scarcella & Oxford, 1992). Students have opportunities to respond to their classmates drafts in a number of ways. For example, students react to composition length, assess task completion, identify main points, establish clarity of main points, and make determinations about the support those main points receive. The exercises also encourage students to give positive, constructive feedback. This is subtle but important component because positive feedback engenders high self-esteem, and this then makes for better, more confident writers.

To encourage students to reflect on their writing and the process, sections called Learning Logs are located throughout the textbook to foster a metacognitive awareness of writing processes. For example, students might be asked to reflect on effectiveness of an essay title, identify differences between for example and such as, or consider how to organize a cause and effect paper. Although not necessary for achieving a proper understanding of the chapter, the Learning Logs are a handy addition for any teacher wanting to cover a particular topic more fully.

The final stage of the writing process is polishing. To develop an editorial disposition, students do exercises at the end of each chapter that offer instruction on proofreading symbols, checking classmate’s drafts for grammar mistakes, spelling, and punctuation errors, and learning to identify and shorten overly long sentences.

Crafting Compositions adheres to the process approach (brainstorming, freewriting, selecting ideas, rewriting, proofreading) of writing, and does this by balancing reading, grammar study, and writing. An underlying tenet of the book is that through self-discovery exercises, students learn about the process of writing, and I feel this book is successful in doing this.

Crafting Compositions is an excellent tool for the ESL composition teacher who believes in integrated and balanced approach to the learning of writing. I heartily recommend Crafting Compositions for any ESL teacher seeking an effective classroom textbook, a reference tool, or an additional source of composition exercises.

References

Eisterhold, J. C. (1990). Reading-writing connections: Toward a description for second language learners. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 88-101). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Esmaeili, H. (2002). Integrated reading and writing tasks and ESL students’ reading and writing performance in an English language test. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 58, 599-622.

Scarcella, R., & Oxford, R. (1992). The tapestry of language learning: The individual in the communicative classroom. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.

Shanahan, T. (1984). Nature of reading-writing relation: An exploratory multivariate analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 466-477.

Tierney, R. J., & Shanahan, T. (1991). Research on the reading-writing relationship: Interactions, transactions, and outcomes. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 246-280), New York: Longman.

Matthew Currier
University of Northern Iowa
<matthewcurrierhotmail.com>

© Copyright rests with authors. Please cite TESL-EJ appropriately.

Editor’s Note: The HTML version contains no page numbers. Please use the PDF version of this article for citations.

© 1994–2023 TESL-EJ, ISSN 1072-4303
Copyright of articles rests with the authors.